https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429094 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. It ruled that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make additions under Section 153A without incriminating material found during the search. The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborative evidence to support statements recorded under Section 132(4) for any additions to be valid. The additions regarding share premium and unsecured loans were deleted as the original assessment had accepted the transactions as genuine, and no new incriminating material was presented during the search. en-us Wed, 28 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Oct 2022 08:51:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429094 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. It ruled that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make additions under Section 153A without incriminating material found during the search. The Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborative evidence to support statements recorded under Section 132(4) for any additions to be valid. The additions regarding share premium and unsecured loans were deleted as the original assessment had accepted the transactions as genuine, and no new incriminating material was presented during the search. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429094