https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173109 Additions for unexplained investment in land purchase could not be sustained on the basis of an alleged higher sale consideration unless the department proved that such consideration actually passed between the parties. The vendor's statements were retracted and, without independent corroboration, were insufficient to support the addition. The assessee was also denied an effective opportunity to test the witnesses through cross-examination. As no material error, misreading of evidence, or perversity in the concurrent findings of the lower authorities was shown, the additions were held unjustified and the issue was answered against the Revenue. en-us Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173109 Additions for unexplained investment in land purchase could not be sustained on the basis of an alleged higher sale consideration unless the department proved that such consideration actually passed between the parties. The vendor's statements were retracted and, without independent corroboration, were insufficient to support the addition. The assessee was also denied an effective opportunity to test the witnesses through cross-examination. As no material error, misreading of evidence, or perversity in the concurrent findings of the lower authorities was shown, the additions were held unjustified and the issue was answered against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173109