https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252352 The Tribunal dismissed all appeals filed by the Revenue, upholding the CIT(A)'s orders. It emphasized that retracted statements recorded under Section 133A lacked evidentiary value without corroborative evidence. Additionally, it confirmed that the road acquisition area should be included in the plot area for deductions under Section 80IB(10). The judgment highlights the significance of corroborative evidence for additions and the proper interpretation of plot area for tax deductions. en-us Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Oct 2014 07:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252352 The Tribunal dismissed all appeals filed by the Revenue, upholding the CIT(A)'s orders. It emphasized that retracted statements recorded under Section 133A lacked evidentiary value without corroborative evidence. Additionally, it confirmed that the road acquisition area should be included in the plot area for deductions under Section 80IB(10). The judgment highlights the significance of corroborative evidence for additions and the proper interpretation of plot area for tax deductions. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252352