<?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>Rough slip cannot constitute valid property agreement for tax purposes; addition based on conjectures set aside</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86957</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal against additions made by the AO regarding an alleged unexplained investment in a Sagar Plaza flat. The Tribunal found that the &quot;kachi parchi&quot; (rough slip) relied upon by tax authorities could not be treated as a valid agreement to sell immovable property as it lacked essential legal requirements - no signatures of parties or witnesses, no mention of the appellant&#039;s name, and was not proven to be in the appellant&#039;s handwriting. The ITAT held that both lower authorities erroneously ignored basic legal principles regarding valid property agreements, and the addition was made merely on surmises and conjectures, rendering it legally unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:31 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=810283" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Rough slip cannot constitute valid property agreement for tax purposes; addition based on conjectures set aside</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86957</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal against additions made by the AO regarding an alleged unexplained investment in a Sagar Plaza flat. The Tribunal found that the &quot;kachi parchi&quot; (rough slip) relied upon by tax authorities could not be treated as a valid agreement to sell immovable property as it lacked essential legal requirements - no signatures of parties or witnesses, no mention of the appellant&#039;s name, and was not proven to be in the appellant&#039;s handwriting. The ITAT held that both lower authorities erroneously ignored basic legal principles regarding valid property agreements, and the addition was made merely on surmises and conjectures, rendering it legally unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:31 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>