https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772289 ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the reopening of assessment under Section 147. The tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of investment in immovable property through documentary evidence of fixed deposit maturity proceeds. The AO's assumption that cash deposits were unexplained was deemed conjectural and unsupported by facts. The addition under Section 56(2)(viib) was ruled unjustified as this provision was not applicable to AY 2011-12, having come into effect from AY 2014-15. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh examination, granting the assessee opportunity to present evidence effectively. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jun 2025 08:30:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772289 ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the reopening of assessment under Section 147. The tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of investment in immovable property through documentary evidence of fixed deposit maturity proceeds. The AO's assumption that cash deposits were unexplained was deemed conjectural and unsupported by facts. The addition under Section 56(2)(viib) was ruled unjustified as this provision was not applicable to AY 2011-12, having come into effect from AY 2014-15. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh examination, granting the assessee opportunity to present evidence effectively. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772289