https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435335 The Tribunal allowed both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No. 1145/Ahd/2017 and ITA No. 177/Ahd/2019 for Assessment Year 2012-13. The addition of Rs. 42,84,150/- as unexplained investment under Section 69C was challenged successfully, emphasizing the burden of proof under Section 69/69A. Additionally, the penalty of Rs. 10,95,120/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was deemed unjustified due to the lack of justification for invoking the penalty provision. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of considering evidence and justifications in tax assessments and penalty impositions. en-us Wed, 15 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Mar 2023 08:38:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435335 The Tribunal allowed both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No. 1145/Ahd/2017 and ITA No. 177/Ahd/2019 for Assessment Year 2012-13. The addition of Rs. 42,84,150/- as unexplained investment under Section 69C was challenged successfully, emphasizing the burden of proof under Section 69/69A. Additionally, the penalty of Rs. 10,95,120/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was deemed unjustified due to the lack of justification for invoking the penalty provision. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of considering evidence and justifications in tax assessments and penalty impositions. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435335