HC Justified Sec. 68 Additions as Assessee Couldn’t Co-Relate Cash Found During Search With Amount Noted in Loose Papers

Case Details: Ramchandra Dada Shinde vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - [2025] 173 taxmann.com 654 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.
• B.V. Jhaveri, S. Sriram & Siddhartha R. Ronghe for the Appellant.
• Suresh Kumar for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee was an individual. Bharati Vidyapeeth and the premises owned by the assessee were searched. During the search, Rs. 3,14,83,870 was found with the assessee. The appellant offered this amount for tax in the relevant assessment year. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) still made the addition.

The AO also added Rs. 2,00,50,000 based on entries on loose papers. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal confirmed the addition. The aggrieved-assessee filed the instant appeal before the Bombay High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the assessee admitted using or, as the Tribunal states, “misusing” his position with Bharati Vidyapeeth to help students get admissions in the institutions of courses run by the Vidyapeeth. He also admitted that on many occasions, students used to get admissions on their own merit, but still, he would collect money from such students. He also admitted that if any students applied for admission, he would collect money from them, and if such students did not get admission, he would refund the said amount.

Based on such statements and the material on record, the lower authorities concluded that the assessee could not correlate the amount of cash seized with the amount noted in the documents. The Tribunal also referred to the assessee’s statement about using code figures regarding his ‘consultancy fees’. The assessee accepted all these documents.

No case was made out to disturb the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the AO and CIT (A). The questions proposed did not arise. In any event, the questions give rise to no substantial question of law.