<?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>2026 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786348</link>
    <description>Addition under section 69A read with section 115BBE was deleted by the appellate authority and the Revenue appeal dismissed where the assessing officer relied solely on Investigation Wing information and a third party statement without providing transaction dates, places, bank details or any link to the assessee. The tribunal affirmed that additions based on unverified third party information or suspicion are unsustainable, the burden rests on the AO to produce cogent corroborative evidence of unexplained money, and denial of opportunity to cross examine vitiated the addition; therefore restoring the addition for further roving enquiry was unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:36:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=885717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 496 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786348</link>
      <description>Addition under section 69A read with section 115BBE was deleted by the appellate authority and the Revenue appeal dismissed where the assessing officer relied solely on Investigation Wing information and a third party statement without providing transaction dates, places, bank details or any link to the assessee. The tribunal affirmed that additions based on unverified third party information or suspicion are unsustainable, the burden rests on the AO to produce cogent corroborative evidence of unexplained money, and denial of opportunity to cross examine vitiated the addition; therefore restoring the addition for further roving enquiry was unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>