https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375029 The Court ruled in favor of the assessee on the burden of proof and remand issues, upholding the addition of undisclosed investments in one case and reversing the decision to set aside an addition in another. The Court emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence in assessment orders and the Department's burden to verify additions based on recovered documents. ITA No.366 of 2010 was rejected, ITA No.226 of 2010 was allowed, and ITA No.211 of 2010 was partly allowed, based on the specific circumstances and evidence presented in each case. en-us Thu, 31 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375029 The Court ruled in favor of the assessee on the burden of proof and remand issues, upholding the addition of undisclosed investments in one case and reversing the decision to set aside an addition in another. The Court emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence in assessment orders and the Department's burden to verify additions based on recovered documents. ITA No.366 of 2010 was rejected, ITA No.226 of 2010 was allowed, and ITA No.211 of 2010 was partly allowed, based on the specific circumstances and evidence presented in each case. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 31 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375029