https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430744 Addition based on a seized third-party saudha chithi was unsustainable where the document did not bear the assessee's name or signature, was not recovered from the assessee, and was unsupported by independent evidence of receipt of consideration. Retractions by the supporting witnesses, denial by the assessee and co-owners, and the continued existence of the recorded owners' names without a registered sale deed further weakened the Revenue's case. The Tribunal also applied the principle that material relied upon for an addition must be tested through effective cross-examination; in the absence of such opportunity and clear linkage to the alleged unaccounted transaction, the addition was deleted. en-us Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2023 23:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430744 Addition based on a seized third-party saudha chithi was unsustainable where the document did not bear the assessee's name or signature, was not recovered from the assessee, and was unsupported by independent evidence of receipt of consideration. Retractions by the supporting witnesses, denial by the assessee and co-owners, and the continued existence of the recorded owners' names without a registered sale deed further weakened the Revenue's case. The Tribunal also applied the principle that material relied upon for an addition must be tested through effective cross-examination; in the absence of such opportunity and clear linkage to the alleged unaccounted transaction, the addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430744