https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776632 The ITAT Mumbai held that the addition under section 69 as unexplained investment was not justified. The assessee, a housewife with no taxable income, had purchased a property jointly with her husband for Rs. 1 crore, supported by bank statements and a home loan sanctioned in the husband's name. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had earlier deleted the penalty under section 271F, acknowledging the source of funds through the husband. Given the clear explanation and documentary evidence of the legitimate source, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted. The assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Aug 2025 08:26:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776632 The ITAT Mumbai held that the addition under section 69 as unexplained investment was not justified. The assessee, a housewife with no taxable income, had purchased a property jointly with her husband for Rs. 1 crore, supported by bank statements and a home loan sanctioned in the husband's name. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had earlier deleted the penalty under section 271F, acknowledging the source of funds through the husband. Given the clear explanation and documentary evidence of the legitimate source, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted. The assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776632