https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86011 ITAT ruled in favor of assessee on two key issues. First, the allegation of "on-money" payment for residential property was rejected as the difference between actual payment and registered value cannot be deemed undisclosed income when payments were made through verified banking channels and loan disbursements. Second, DRP's direction to AO for further verification post-DRP proceedings was held ultra vires as per Sec 144C. DRP must conduct verifications during proceedings under 144C(7), not after issuing directions. AO must complete assessment within one month of receiving DRP directions without additional inquiry. Consequently, the addition made in Final Assessment Order was held without jurisdiction and deleted. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:04 +0530 Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86011 ITAT ruled in favor of assessee on two key issues. First, the allegation of "on-money" payment for residential property was rejected as the difference between actual payment and registered value cannot be deemed undisclosed income when payments were made through verified banking channels and loan disbursements. Second, DRP's direction to AO for further verification post-DRP proceedings was held ultra vires as per Sec 144C. DRP must conduct verifications during proceedings under 144C(7), not after issuing directions. AO must complete assessment within one month of receiving DRP directions without additional inquiry. Consequently, the addition made in Final Assessment Order was held without jurisdiction and deleted. Highlights Income Tax Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:04 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86011