https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777056 In a jointly purchased property, equal ownership was presumed in the absence of any contrary stipulation in the purchase deed, so the assessee's investment had to be examined on the basis of one-half of the total cost, including stamp duty and registration charges. The assessee explained Rs. 22,00,000 out of her share investment of Rs. 22,73,850 through her husband's bank account, leaving only Rs. 73,850 unexplained. The lower authorities erred in sustaining the full addition under section 69 without properly crediting the explained source already accepted. The addition was therefore held unsustainable to the extent made and was deleted. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Aug 2025 08:31:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777056 In a jointly purchased property, equal ownership was presumed in the absence of any contrary stipulation in the purchase deed, so the assessee's investment had to be examined on the basis of one-half of the total cost, including stamp duty and registration charges. The assessee explained Rs. 22,00,000 out of her share investment of Rs. 22,73,850 through her husband's bank account, leaving only Rs. 73,850 unexplained. The lower authorities erred in sustaining the full addition under section 69 without properly crediting the explained source already accepted. The addition was therefore held unsustainable to the extent made and was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777056