https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214705 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, ruling that the AO's reference to the DVO under Section 142A was unjustified due to the lack of evidence suggesting undisclosed investment. The burden of proof was deemed to lie with the Revenue, and as no such evidence was found during the search, the additions made by the AO were deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. en-us Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214705 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, ruling that the AO's reference to the DVO under Section 142A was unjustified due to the lack of evidence suggesting undisclosed investment. The burden of proof was deemed to lie with the Revenue, and as no such evidence was found during the search, the additions made by the AO were deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214705