https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281183 The Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, found that the addition of Rs. 5,75,000 for unexplained investment in immovable property was unjustified. The Tribunal noted that the land in question was actually sold to a third party, not to the assessee or his son as claimed. As the AO's addition was solely based on the surrender made during the survey and the actual sale deed contradicted this, the Tribunal ruled the addition unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Rs. 5,75,000 addition was deleted. en-us Tue, 24 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jun 2019 21:39:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281183 The Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, found that the addition of Rs. 5,75,000 for unexplained investment in immovable property was unjustified. The Tribunal noted that the land in question was actually sold to a third party, not to the assessee or his son as claimed. As the AO's addition was solely based on the surrender made during the survey and the actual sale deed contradicted this, the Tribunal ruled the addition unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the Rs. 5,75,000 addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 24 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281183