<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (4) TMI 219 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394312</link>
    <description>An addition for undisclosed long-term capital gain on alleged cash component in the sale of agricultural land cannot be sustained on the basis of loose papers and a third-party statement unless the material shows a direct, contemporaneous, and corroborated link with the assessee&#039;s transaction. Here, the seized entries were not contemporaneous with the registered sale deeds, the statement relied upon was later retracted or denied in assessment proceedings, and no independent evidence showed receipt of cash through the sale consideration. The ITAT therefore held that the material was insufficient to support the addition and deleted it in favour of the assessees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 17:52:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609624" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (4) TMI 219 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394312</link>
      <description>An addition for undisclosed long-term capital gain on alleged cash component in the sale of agricultural land cannot be sustained on the basis of loose papers and a third-party statement unless the material shows a direct, contemporaneous, and corroborated link with the assessee&#039;s transaction. Here, the seized entries were not contemporaneous with the registered sale deeds, the statement relied upon was later retracted or denied in assessment proceedings, and no independent evidence showed receipt of cash through the sale consideration. The ITAT therefore held that the material was insufficient to support the addition and deleted it in favour of the assessees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394312</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>