https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246116 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The addition of Rs. 1,60,11,000 under Section 69 for unexplained investment in property was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the addition, which was solely based on an inappropriate valuation report without corroborative evidence of unrecorded payments. The burden of proof was highlighted to lie with the Revenue, and in the absence of compelling evidence, the appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246116 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The addition of Rs. 1,60,11,000 under Section 69 for unexplained investment in property was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the addition, which was solely based on an inappropriate valuation report without corroborative evidence of unrecorded payments. The burden of proof was highlighted to lie with the Revenue, and in the absence of compelling evidence, the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246116