https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429258 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3.61 crores as unexplained investment under Section 69B of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) accepted the assessee's explanation, considering the Ponzi scheme context and supporting evidence, concluding that the amount did not represent unexplained investment. The tribunal emphasized the lack of corroborating evidence for the addition, citing legal precedents requiring corroboration of retracted statements. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s order based on the assessee's substantiated retraction and the absence of disproving evidence by the Assessing Officer. en-us Thu, 19 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Oct 2022 07:25:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429258 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3.61 crores as unexplained investment under Section 69B of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) accepted the assessee's explanation, considering the Ponzi scheme context and supporting evidence, concluding that the amount did not represent unexplained investment. The tribunal emphasized the lack of corroborating evidence for the addition, citing legal precedents requiring corroboration of retracted statements. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s order based on the assessee's substantiated retraction and the absence of disproving evidence by the Assessing Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429258