https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187273 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals, deleting the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding unexplained investment in a residential house and unexplained payments/bogus credits. The ITAT found that discrepancies in the construction cost of the house were due to price escalation, as accepted in the wife's case by the Chennai ITAT. Additionally, the ITAT ruled that mere jottings without corroborative evidence were insufficient to justify additions under section 69C, referencing relevant case law. en-us Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:29:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187273 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals, deleting the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding unexplained investment in a residential house and unexplained payments/bogus credits. The ITAT found that discrepancies in the construction cost of the house were due to price escalation, as accepted in the wife's case by the Chennai ITAT. Additionally, the ITAT ruled that mere jottings without corroborative evidence were insufficient to justify additions under section 69C, referencing relevant case law. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187273