https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783182 ITAT Hyderabad-AT allowed the assessee-firm's appeal and deleted the addition made under s.69A r/w s.115BBE. It held that substantial payments for purchase of land were made directly by the partners from their bank accounts and reflected in registered sale deeds, with corresponding journal entries crediting partners' capital accounts in the firm's books. The AO's finding that only part of the capital was routed through the firm's account was rejected as factually incorrect. ITAT further held that, for AY 2017-18, there was no statutory requirement to prove "source of source" under s.68, and any unexplained capital must be assessed in the hands of the partners, not the firm. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:45:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783182 ITAT Hyderabad-AT allowed the assessee-firm's appeal and deleted the addition made under s.69A r/w s.115BBE. It held that substantial payments for purchase of land were made directly by the partners from their bank accounts and reflected in registered sale deeds, with corresponding journal entries crediting partners' capital accounts in the firm's books. The AO's finding that only part of the capital was routed through the firm's account was rejected as factually incorrect. ITAT further held that, for AY 2017-18, there was no statutory requirement to prove "source of source" under s.68, and any unexplained capital must be assessed in the hands of the partners, not the firm. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783182