https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407238 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 1,54,50,000 on account of unexplained investment in a villa plot. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not provided independent evidence to support the findings based on the CBI's charge sheet. As the CBI's case was pending, the Tribunal ruled that the AO could not solely rely on the charge sheet for making additions. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. en-us Wed, 28 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 May 2021 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407238 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 1,54,50,000 on account of unexplained investment in a villa plot. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not provided independent evidence to support the findings based on the CBI's charge sheet. As the CBI's case was pending, the Tribunal ruled that the AO could not solely rely on the charge sheet for making additions. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407238