<?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>2025 (4) TMI 1476 - ITAT AGRA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769562</link>
    <description>ITAT AGRA allowed partial relief to assessee in post-search assessment u/s 153A. Tribunal deleted addition based on diary seized in third party&#039;s name, finding no evidence of assessee&#039;s ownership. Addition for unexplained bank deposits was deleted as amounts were properly recorded in balance sheet, establishing accounted sources. Unsecured loans addition was deleted since assessee provided lender details and affidavits, with non-response to AO notices insufficient to prove loans were bogus. However, additions for unexplained expenses in seized documents and fertilizer purchases through employee were upheld due to lack of substantiation by assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2025 11:58:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=817791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1476 - ITAT AGRA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769562</link>
      <description>ITAT AGRA allowed partial relief to assessee in post-search assessment u/s 153A. Tribunal deleted addition based on diary seized in third party&#039;s name, finding no evidence of assessee&#039;s ownership. Addition for unexplained bank deposits was deleted as amounts were properly recorded in balance sheet, establishing accounted sources. Unsecured loans addition was deleted since assessee provided lender details and affidavits, with non-response to AO notices insufficient to prove loans were bogus. However, additions for unexplained expenses in seized documents and fertilizer purchases through employee were upheld due to lack of substantiation by assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>