https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310932 The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee's and the Revenue's appeals, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions. It affirmed the deletion of disallowances concerning unverifiable construction expenses and unexplained deposits and gifts, citing sufficient evidence and established genuineness. However, it sustained the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- as income under Section 68, treating the gift received by the assessee's son as not genuine due to lack of satisfactory explanation regarding the donor's relation and the source of the gift. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s findings well-reasoned and required no interference. en-us Mon, 05 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310932 The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee's and the Revenue's appeals, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions. It affirmed the deletion of disallowances concerning unverifiable construction expenses and unexplained deposits and gifts, citing sufficient evidence and established genuineness. However, it sustained the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- as income under Section 68, treating the gift received by the assessee's son as not genuine due to lack of satisfactory explanation regarding the donor's relation and the source of the gift. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s findings well-reasoned and required no interference. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310932