https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762308 ITAT Bangalore held that additions under sections 69B and 153A based solely on loose sheets and statements recorded under section 132(4) cannot be sustained without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal ruled that unsubstantiated seized material alone cannot constitute conclusive evidence, and presumptions under section 132(4) are rebuttable. The AO cannot make additions based on suspicion, conjectures, or circumstantial evidence without proper corroboration. Multiple additions were deleted as they relied only on uncorroborated statements and seized documents without establishing actual undisclosed transactions. The assessee's appeal was allowed, with some issues remitted for fresh consideration. en-us Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:56:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762308 ITAT Bangalore held that additions under sections 69B and 153A based solely on loose sheets and statements recorded under section 132(4) cannot be sustained without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal ruled that unsubstantiated seized material alone cannot constitute conclusive evidence, and presumptions under section 132(4) are rebuttable. The AO cannot make additions based on suspicion, conjectures, or circumstantial evidence without proper corroboration. Multiple additions were deleted as they relied only on uncorroborated statements and seized documents without establishing actual undisclosed transactions. The assessee's appeal was allowed, with some issues remitted for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762308