<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Third-party statements require cross-examination for tax additions, says ITAT; unsupported disclosures insufficient.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84610</link>
    <description>The ITAT held that a statement/document received from a third party cannot be relied upon for making an addition u/s 69A, without giving the assessee an opportunity to contradict the same and cross-examine the person who gave the statement/document. The suo-moto disclosure made by the assessee before the Settlement Commission, without corroborative material/evidence, cannot be the basis for making an addition. In the present case, except for a letter filed before the DCIT/Settlement Commission, there was no other corroborative material/evidence for sustaining the addition. Moreover, no opportunity was given to the assessee to cross-examine the person who made the disclosure/issued the letter relied upon for the addition. Consequently, the addition was held unsustainable and deleted in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2025 08:42:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2025 08:42:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Third-party statements require cross-examination for tax additions, says ITAT; unsupported disclosures insufficient.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84610</link>
      <description>The ITAT held that a statement/document received from a third party cannot be relied upon for making an addition u/s 69A, without giving the assessee an opportunity to contradict the same and cross-examine the person who gave the statement/document. The suo-moto disclosure made by the assessee before the Settlement Commission, without corroborative material/evidence, cannot be the basis for making an addition. In the present case, except for a letter filed before the DCIT/Settlement Commission, there was no other corroborative material/evidence for sustaining the addition. Moreover, no opportunity was given to the assessee to cross-examine the person who made the disclosure/issued the letter relied upon for the addition. Consequently, the addition was held unsustainable and deleted in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2025 08:42:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84610</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>