https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, concluding that the addition of Rs. 45,71,382 made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A) lacked substantiating evidence. The Tribunal criticized the speculative reasoning and lack of corroborative material in justifying the addition based on survey statements. Emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence for such additions, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the inadequacy of the CIT(A)'s decision and supporting its decision with relevant case law. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Dec 2018 08:57:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, concluding that the addition of Rs. 45,71,382 made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A) lacked substantiating evidence. The Tribunal criticized the speculative reasoning and lack of corroborative material in justifying the addition based on survey statements. Emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence for such additions, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the inadequacy of the CIT(A)'s decision and supporting its decision with relevant case law. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277359