https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212364 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the Tax Appeal, affirming that Section 50C's deeming provision for property transactions cannot be extended to determine undisclosed investments under Section 69B without proper evidence. The Assessing Officer erred in applying Section 50C to conclude undisclosed investment by the assessee, who provided supporting evidence for the transaction price. The court highlighted the need for independent evidence of higher actual price paid by the assessee and referenced a Madras High Court case emphasizing Stamp Authorities' valuation methods. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed due to lack of evidence of inadequate consideration received by the assessee. en-us Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 15 Apr 2012 17:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212364 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the Tax Appeal, affirming that Section 50C's deeming provision for property transactions cannot be extended to determine undisclosed investments under Section 69B without proper evidence. The Assessing Officer erred in applying Section 50C to conclude undisclosed investment by the assessee, who provided supporting evidence for the transaction price. The court highlighted the need for independent evidence of higher actual price paid by the assessee and referenced a Madras High Court case emphasizing Stamp Authorities' valuation methods. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed due to lack of evidence of inadequate consideration received by the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212364