https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361130 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment based on tangible material indicating income escapement. However, it set aside the addition of Rs. 48,11,525 due to lack of corroboration and the need for cross-examination. Other issues, such as the addition of commission/brokerage income and undisclosed income for a plot purchase, were not explicitly ruled upon but would likely require substantial evidence. The charging of interest under sections 234B and 234C would be consequential to upheld additions. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 May 2018 15:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361130 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment based on tangible material indicating income escapement. However, it set aside the addition of Rs. 48,11,525 due to lack of corroboration and the need for cross-examination. Other issues, such as the addition of commission/brokerage income and undisclosed income for a plot purchase, were not explicitly ruled upon but would likely require substantial evidence. The charging of interest under sections 234B and 234C would be consequential to upheld additions. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361130