<?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 (11) TMI 885 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781417</link>
    <description>Search assessments require incriminating material with a demonstrable nexus to the assessee, and third-party seized documents or uncorroborated admissions cannot support broad additions without independent linkage. A delayed retraction does not erase the evidentiary value of a search statement unless supported by cogent proof of coercion or duress. Turnover-wide extrapolation, arbitrary gross profit enhancement, and ad hoc under-invoicing estimates were rejected where the record justified only a limited transaction-specific adjustment. The section 80IA disallowance failed for want of changed facts, the section 153D approval challenge failed as the approval was not mechanical, and the depreciation issue on the power plant was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2025 07:56:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=864746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 885 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781417</link>
      <description>Search assessments require incriminating material with a demonstrable nexus to the assessee, and third-party seized documents or uncorroborated admissions cannot support broad additions without independent linkage. A delayed retraction does not erase the evidentiary value of a search statement unless supported by cogent proof of coercion or duress. Turnover-wide extrapolation, arbitrary gross profit enhancement, and ad hoc under-invoicing estimates were rejected where the record justified only a limited transaction-specific adjustment. The section 80IA disallowance failed for want of changed facts, the section 153D approval challenge failed as the approval was not mechanical, and the depreciation issue on the power plant was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>