https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433021 The ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the addition of Rs.16,73,700 as unexplained investment for Assessment Year 2011-12. The tribunal considered the joint ownership of the property with the appellant's husband and found the evidence insufficient to justify the addition. The lack of concrete evidence of on-money payments and failure to address the joint ownership led to the ruling in favor of the appellant, concluding that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was unjustifiable. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2023 08:38:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433021 The ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the addition of Rs.16,73,700 as unexplained investment for Assessment Year 2011-12. The tribunal considered the joint ownership of the property with the appellant's husband and found the evidence insufficient to justify the addition. The lack of concrete evidence of on-money payments and failure to address the joint ownership led to the ruling in favor of the appellant, concluding that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was unjustifiable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433021