https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445436 ITAT Jaipur held that additions under Section 69 for unexplained investments were factually incorrect and vacated all additions. The tribunal found that mere registration amounts and TDS considerations cannot constitute actual payments by the assessee. For property purchases, the assessee demonstrated through evidence that payments were made from father's housing loan proceeds, not unexplained sources. The revenue failed to prove actual payments were made by the assessee. The tribunal emphasized that unpaid amounts or future commitments to builders cannot be treated as unexplained investments when no actual payment has occurred. en-us Thu, 05 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Nov 2023 17:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445436 ITAT Jaipur held that additions under Section 69 for unexplained investments were factually incorrect and vacated all additions. The tribunal found that mere registration amounts and TDS considerations cannot constitute actual payments by the assessee. For property purchases, the assessee demonstrated through evidence that payments were made from father's housing loan proceeds, not unexplained sources. The revenue failed to prove actual payments were made by the assessee. The tribunal emphasized that unpaid amounts or future commitments to builders cannot be treated as unexplained investments when no actual payment has occurred. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 05 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445436