https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781605 ITAT (Mum) allowed the assessee's appeal, holding the addition under s.69 unsustainable. The tribunal found the assessee-an NRI who earned salary abroad and remitted funds for a residential property-had adequately proved the foreign source and flow of funds. The lower authorities and DRP rejected documentary evidence on speculative, unsubstantiated grounds without conducting available verification or independent enquiries. Since the income was not received, accrued, or deemed to accrue in India under s.5(2), it could not be indirectly taxed under s.69; the addition was therefore deleted. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2025 08:42:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781605 ITAT (Mum) allowed the assessee's appeal, holding the addition under s.69 unsustainable. The tribunal found the assessee-an NRI who earned salary abroad and remitted funds for a residential property-had adequately proved the foreign source and flow of funds. The lower authorities and DRP rejected documentary evidence on speculative, unsubstantiated grounds without conducting available verification or independent enquiries. Since the income was not received, accrued, or deemed to accrue in India under s.5(2), it could not be indirectly taxed under s.69; the addition was therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781605