https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780618 ITAT (Hyderabad) held that the assessee's claim of payment for an immovable property was not credible and rejected the unexplained investment. The tribunal found contradictions between an unregistered agreement stating payment of Rs.70 lakhs in May 2013 and bank evidence showing Rs.27 lakhs paid in July 2015. A prior joint development agreement and a supplementary agreement dated 02/04/2012 showed the developer lacked a demarcated saleable area before those dates, so alleged earlier payments could not be accepted. Decision rendered against the assessee. en-us Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:49:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780618 ITAT (Hyderabad) held that the assessee's claim of payment for an immovable property was not credible and rejected the unexplained investment. The tribunal found contradictions between an unregistered agreement stating payment of Rs.70 lakhs in May 2013 and bank evidence showing Rs.27 lakhs paid in July 2015. A prior joint development agreement and a supplementary agreement dated 02/04/2012 showed the developer lacked a demarcated saleable area before those dates, so alleged earlier payments could not be accepted. Decision rendered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780618