<?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>Reassessment under s.147 by notice under s.148 valid, but Rs.5,00,000 cash addition deleted for lack of evidence</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93482</link>
    <description>ITAT upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147 by notice under s.148, finding no infirmity in reopening based on documents seized from a third party and dismissing the challenge that proceedings should have been under ss.153A/153C. However, ITAT found the substantive additions for alleged cash receipts unsustainable: seized papers did not bear the assessee&#039;s name, no corroborative evidence linked the entries to the assessee, and the disputed Rs.5,00,000 was shown returned to a related group company with bank records and no proof of cash receipt by the assessee. AO was directed to delete the additions; respective grounds of appeal were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2025 09:08:21 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2025 09:08:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=859391" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Reassessment under s.147 by notice under s.148 valid, but Rs.5,00,000 cash addition deleted for lack of evidence</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93482</link>
      <description>ITAT upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147 by notice under s.148, finding no infirmity in reopening based on documents seized from a third party and dismissing the challenge that proceedings should have been under ss.153A/153C. However, ITAT found the substantive additions for alleged cash receipts unsustainable: seized papers did not bear the assessee&#039;s name, no corroborative evidence linked the entries to the assessee, and the disputed Rs.5,00,000 was shown returned to a related group company with bank records and no proof of cash receipt by the assessee. AO was directed to delete the additions; respective grounds of appeal were allowed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2025 09:08:21 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>