https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774245 ITAT Hyderabad partially allowed the assessee's appeal. The tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 48 lakhs under section 69A for unexplained cash seized during search, ruling that since the assessee had already declared and paid taxes on this amount for AY 2019-20, making the same addition for AY 2020-21 based solely on seizure date was illogical and constituted double taxation. However, the tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 10 lakhs agricultural income under "Income from Other Sources" as the assessee failed to provide evidence supporting the agricultural income claim despite declaring it in the return filed under section 139(4). en-us Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jul 2025 08:47:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774245 ITAT Hyderabad partially allowed the assessee's appeal. The tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 48 lakhs under section 69A for unexplained cash seized during search, ruling that since the assessee had already declared and paid taxes on this amount for AY 2019-20, making the same addition for AY 2020-21 based solely on seizure date was illogical and constituted double taxation. However, the tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 10 lakhs agricultural income under "Income from Other Sources" as the assessee failed to provide evidence supporting the agricultural income claim despite declaring it in the return filed under section 139(4). Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774245