https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352147 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, remanding specific issues for re-evaluation, particularly regarding the application of UP PWD rates for construction costs. Other additions by the Assessing Officer were upheld due to insufficient evidence provided by the assessee, including unexplained investments from agricultural income, gifts from relatives, and bank deposits. The challenge to the reopening of assessments under section 148 of the I.T. Act was dismissed as the assessee did not press the ground. en-us Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Dec 2017 09:51:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352147 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, remanding specific issues for re-evaluation, particularly regarding the application of UP PWD rates for construction costs. Other additions by the Assessing Officer were upheld due to insufficient evidence provided by the assessee, including unexplained investments from agricultural income, gifts from relatives, and bank deposits. The challenge to the reopening of assessments under section 148 of the I.T. Act was dismissed as the assessee did not press the ground. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352147