https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428985 The case involved issues regarding unexplained investments under section 69 of the Income Tax Act and confirmation of interest levied under sections 234A/B/C. The Assessing Officer treated the undisclosed property transactions as unexplained income. The CIT(A) upheld this decision due to lack of evidence from the assessee. The ITAT remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for further investigation to clarify the ownership status and sources of investment. The appeal challenging the interest levied was not explicitly discussed. The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing a thorough examination of the property-related details. en-us Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Oct 2022 09:10:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428985 The case involved issues regarding unexplained investments under section 69 of the Income Tax Act and confirmation of interest levied under sections 234A/B/C. The Assessing Officer treated the undisclosed property transactions as unexplained income. The CIT(A) upheld this decision due to lack of evidence from the assessee. The ITAT remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for further investigation to clarify the ownership status and sources of investment. The appeal challenging the interest levied was not explicitly discussed. The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing a thorough examination of the property-related details. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428985