https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464620 ITAT DELHI - AT set aside additions treated as unexplained credit under s.68 and restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. The tribunal found the CIT(A) admitted an agreement to sell but failed to consider it fully and misread the transaction: advance of Rs.90 lakhs was for a sale of land valuing over Rs.20 crore. AO was directed to reopen the issue, afford the assessee adequate hearing, and allow production of the original agreement and evidence of the purchaser's creditworthiness; appeal allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 11 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Nov 2025 19:04:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464620 ITAT DELHI - AT set aside additions treated as unexplained credit under s.68 and restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. The tribunal found the CIT(A) admitted an agreement to sell but failed to consider it fully and misread the transaction: advance of Rs.90 lakhs was for a sale of land valuing over Rs.20 crore. AO was directed to reopen the issue, afford the assessee adequate hearing, and allow production of the original agreement and evidence of the purchaser's creditworthiness; appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464620