<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2000 (3) TMI 177 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63058</link>
    <description>In block assessment, the alleged higher sale consideration for immovable property could not be adopted solely on the basis of an unsigned agreement to sell and un-confronted statements, especially where the assessee&#039;s own search statement, return under section 139(1), and the registered sale deeds supported a lower figure. The transaction was therefore to be computed on the basis of Rs. 38 lakhs rather than the higher alleged amount. The addition for unexplained bank deposits was also found to have been made without giving adequate opportunity to explain the source, so fairness required fresh adjudication. That issue was set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:55:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 177 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63058</link>
      <description>In block assessment, the alleged higher sale consideration for immovable property could not be adopted solely on the basis of an unsigned agreement to sell and un-confronted statements, especially where the assessee&#039;s own search statement, return under section 139(1), and the registered sale deeds supported a lower figure. The transaction was therefore to be computed on the basis of Rs. 38 lakhs rather than the higher alleged amount. The addition for unexplained bank deposits was also found to have been made without giving adequate opportunity to explain the source, so fairness required fresh adjudication. That issue was set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>