https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756515 The ITAT Bangalore ruled that additions under section 68 cannot be made solely based on statements recorded under section 132(4) without corroborative evidence. The tribunal held that the Department must collect cogent evidence to support notings on loose sheets, which are considered dumb documents with no evidentiary value. The AO's conclusions based on presumptions and assumptions without corroborative material were rejected. The matter was remitted to the AO with directions for the assessee to prove section 68 ingredients for credits appearing in the balance sheet. For assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, additions under sections 69B and 69C based on unsubstantiated seized material and statements under section 132(4) were deleted. en-us Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Aug 2024 13:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756515 The ITAT Bangalore ruled that additions under section 68 cannot be made solely based on statements recorded under section 132(4) without corroborative evidence. The tribunal held that the Department must collect cogent evidence to support notings on loose sheets, which are considered dumb documents with no evidentiary value. The AO's conclusions based on presumptions and assumptions without corroborative material were rejected. The matter was remitted to the AO with directions for the assessee to prove section 68 ingredients for credits appearing in the balance sheet. For assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, additions under sections 69B and 69C based on unsubstantiated seized material and statements under section 132(4) were deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756515