https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186851 The Revenue's appeal against the addition of unexplained investment in construction by the Assessing Officer was dismissed by the Tribunal. The CIT(A) deleted the addition of &8377; 3.48 crores to the total income, as the evidence provided by the assessee demonstrated that the construction expenses were covered by available funds. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding the AO's observation lacking evidence. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under section 69 of the IT Act. The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's contention regarding the violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules, 1962, as no new evidence was submitted before the CIT(A). en-us Tue, 20 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Oct 2016 10:23:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186851 The Revenue's appeal against the addition of unexplained investment in construction by the Assessing Officer was dismissed by the Tribunal. The CIT(A) deleted the addition of &8377; 3.48 crores to the total income, as the evidence provided by the assessee demonstrated that the construction expenses were covered by available funds. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding the AO's observation lacking evidence. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under section 69 of the IT Act. The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's contention regarding the violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules, 1962, as no new evidence was submitted before the CIT(A). Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186851