<?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 (9) TMI 791 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778302</link>
    <description>In a search assessment, additions based only on ad hoc estimation or uncorroborated documents were deleted. Foreign travel and vehicle expense disallowances failed because the Revenue lacked cogent material showing personal use or undisclosed expenditure, while the assessee&#039;s explanation of third-party support was accepted. Jewellery additions were also deleted as family withdrawals, husband&#039;s withdrawals, customary factors and CBDT Instruction No. 1916 supported the explanation. The alleged on-money receipt from sale of immovable property was rejected because it rested on an unverified photocopy and a vague mobile slip, without independent inquiry or corroboration. The assessee obtained full relief in both appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2025 08:47:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 791 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778302</link>
      <description>In a search assessment, additions based only on ad hoc estimation or uncorroborated documents were deleted. Foreign travel and vehicle expense disallowances failed because the Revenue lacked cogent material showing personal use or undisclosed expenditure, while the assessee&#039;s explanation of third-party support was accepted. Jewellery additions were also deleted as family withdrawals, husband&#039;s withdrawals, customary factors and CBDT Instruction No. 1916 supported the explanation. The alleged on-money receipt from sale of immovable property was rejected because it rested on an unverified photocopy and a vague mobile slip, without independent inquiry or corroboration. The assessee obtained full relief in both appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778302</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>