<?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 (5) TMI 1775 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771503</link>
    <description>The ITAT Chandigarh ruled against the revenue in a case involving addition under section 69 for unexplained cash found in lockers. The tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s family operated as a joint family with common residence, kitchen, and business, with lockers held by multiple family members at the same bank. The department had already accepted that cash belonged to a family member from flat sale proceeds, on which capital gains tax was charged. Since the cash was found during a search conducted after the sale, and the department treated other family assets as joint without adverse inference, the tribunal held the addition was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 May 2025 08:32:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1775 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771503</link>
      <description>The ITAT Chandigarh ruled against the revenue in a case involving addition under section 69 for unexplained cash found in lockers. The tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s family operated as a joint family with common residence, kitchen, and business, with lockers held by multiple family members at the same bank. The department had already accepted that cash belonged to a family member from flat sale proceeds, on which capital gains tax was charged. Since the cash was found during a search conducted after the sale, and the department treated other family assets as joint without adverse inference, the tribunal held the addition was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>