https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367813 An addition for alleged on-money on flat purchase could not be sustained where the seized pen drive contained only date-wise cash entries against flat numbers and did not name the assessee or directly link the assessee to any extra payment. The Tribunal also found that reliance on third-party statements was improper because the assessee was not given a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or rebut the adverse material. In the absence of clinching corroboration, general admissions by the group's promoters did not establish that the assessee paid consideration over and above the stated amount. The unexplained-income addition was therefore deleted. en-us Mon, 17 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Sep 2018 08:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367813 An addition for alleged on-money on flat purchase could not be sustained where the seized pen drive contained only date-wise cash entries against flat numbers and did not name the assessee or directly link the assessee to any extra payment. The Tribunal also found that reliance on third-party statements was improper because the assessee was not given a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or rebut the adverse material. In the absence of clinching corroboration, general admissions by the group's promoters did not establish that the assessee paid consideration over and above the stated amount. The unexplained-income addition was therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367813