https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340240 The High Court dismissed the appeal as no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The addition of unexplained investment in excess stock and disallowance of construction costs were deleted by the Commissioner and upheld by the Tribunal. The Court emphasized the evidentiary value of statements recorded under Sec.133-A and upheld the decisions based on a detailed review of evidence. The judgment highlighted the importance of evidence and reasoning behind lower authorities' decisions, leading to the dismissal of the case. en-us Wed, 08 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Mar 2017 17:38:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340240 The High Court dismissed the appeal as no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The addition of unexplained investment in excess stock and disallowance of construction costs were deleted by the Commissioner and upheld by the Tribunal. The Court emphasized the evidentiary value of statements recorded under Sec.133-A and upheld the decisions based on a detailed review of evidence. The judgment highlighted the importance of evidence and reasoning behind lower authorities' decisions, leading to the dismissal of the case. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340240