https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267362 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition on unexplained investment in constructing an industrial shed, restricting the addition to a specific amount. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of substantive evidence beyond valuation reports to justify such additions, highlighting the burden of proof on the Revenue to establish undisclosed income. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection, stating the issue was factual, not a question of law, and emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in supporting additions on unexplained investments. en-us Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:42:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267362 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition on unexplained investment in constructing an industrial shed, restricting the addition to a specific amount. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of substantive evidence beyond valuation reports to justify such additions, highlighting the burden of proof on the Revenue to establish undisclosed income. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection, stating the issue was factual, not a question of law, and emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in supporting additions on unexplained investments. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267362