https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766697 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting additions made under sections 68 and 37(1) following a search under section 153A. The tribunal held that without incriminating material found during the search, the AO lacked jurisdiction to make assessments for completed/unabated assessment years. Relying on SC precedent in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell and Delhi HC in PCIT v. Pavitra Realcon, the tribunal determined that statements under section 132(4) alone, without corroborating material discovered during search, cannot authorize assessments. The additions for unsecured loans and interest expense disallowances were consequently deleted. en-us Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Mar 2025 08:22:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766697 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting additions made under sections 68 and 37(1) following a search under section 153A. The tribunal held that without incriminating material found during the search, the AO lacked jurisdiction to make assessments for completed/unabated assessment years. Relying on SC precedent in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell and Delhi HC in PCIT v. Pavitra Realcon, the tribunal determined that statements under section 132(4) alone, without corroborating material discovered during search, cannot authorize assessments. The additions for unsecured loans and interest expense disallowances were consequently deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766697