https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176239 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the addition of Rs. 3,81,414, as the department failed to provide sufficient corroborative evidence to prove the alleged "on money" payment for the flat. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the department and overturned the CIT(A)'s decision based solely on a seized document and a third party statement. en-us Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Sep 2023 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176239 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the addition of Rs. 3,81,414, as the department failed to provide sufficient corroborative evidence to prove the alleged "on money" payment for the flat. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the department and overturned the CIT(A)'s decision based solely on a seized document and a third party statement. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176239