https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296853 ITAT Jaipur held that an addition for unexplained investment in land cannot rest on uncorroborated estimates or documents from another proceeding where the evidence shows the assessee acted only as a broker or intermediary and not as the real investor; section 69B was therefore inapplicable, and section 40A(3) did not apply on the facts. It also held that profit from sale of agricultural land was not business income, because the transactions did not amount to an adventure in the nature of trade and the assessee had no regular land-trading business. For the Sarsani land, the Tribunal found the unsigned agreement, estimated market value, and other materials insufficient to sustain section 69B addition, and the declared consideration was accepted. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:38:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296853 ITAT Jaipur held that an addition for unexplained investment in land cannot rest on uncorroborated estimates or documents from another proceeding where the evidence shows the assessee acted only as a broker or intermediary and not as the real investor; section 69B was therefore inapplicable, and section 40A(3) did not apply on the facts. It also held that profit from sale of agricultural land was not business income, because the transactions did not amount to an adventure in the nature of trade and the assessee had no regular land-trading business. For the Sarsani land, the Tribunal found the unsigned agreement, estimated market value, and other materials insufficient to sustain section 69B addition, and the declared consideration was accepted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296853