Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: paripassu in Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta,Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 3 July, 2025Matching Fragments
Addition cannot be made merely on assumption and presumption. We find that when all the noting in the diary for this year are either balances or movement of cash from office to residence and vice versa, there is no reason to deviate from this view already taken by us. As per the legal maxim 'paripassu', the noting without any narration can be placed with equal footing with the noting having abbreviations 'HO', etc. and thus, this explanation of the Assessee is found acceptable. The Assessee also argued that such noting can be termed as rough noting / dumb noting since there is no narration mentioned and the diary was written by various personnel. This explanation of the Assessee also cannot be rejected since where there is no narration, either the same is rough noting or it can be placed with equal footing as per the other noting. Hence, on both these reasoning, we are of the view that the addition sustained of Rs.30 lakhs for AY 2019-20 in respect of this J Kumar Madanlal Gupta two figures of 15 is also deleted and to this extent the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is reversed.