https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464127 ITAT PUNE - AT held the reopening and consequent proceedings bad in law, finding no unexplained investment under s.69C for A.Y.2016-17. The tribunal found payments under a registered agreement were installment-based, not expenditures incurred in the year, so additions under s.69C were based on conjecture and were deleted. Notice u/s.148 and order u/s.148A(d) were held invalid. The AO was directed to delete the Rs.1,54,019 addition and accept the total income as declared in the return. en-us Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Oct 2025 20:17:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464127 ITAT PUNE - AT held the reopening and consequent proceedings bad in law, finding no unexplained investment under s.69C for A.Y.2016-17. The tribunal found payments under a registered agreement were installment-based, not expenditures incurred in the year, so additions under s.69C were based on conjecture and were deleted. Notice u/s.148 and order u/s.148A(d) were held invalid. The AO was directed to delete the Rs.1,54,019 addition and accept the total income as declared in the return. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464127