<?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 (3) TMI 1665 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788910</link>
    <description>In search assessments, limitation under section 153B is linked to the conclusion of search in the assessee&#039;s own panchanama, even where a joint warrant covers multiple persons; the assessments were therefore treated as time-barred. Additions based on third-party electronic records, loose sheets, WhatsApp messages and similar material were held unsustainable without independent corroboration, proof of ownership, and a demonstrated nexus or flow of funds to the assessee. Deduction under section 80IA(4) was also recognised for infrastructure work executed as a subcontractor, the governing test being the nature of the work rather than the formal chain of contract.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1665 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788910</link>
      <description>In search assessments, limitation under section 153B is linked to the conclusion of search in the assessee&#039;s own panchanama, even where a joint warrant covers multiple persons; the assessments were therefore treated as time-barred. Additions based on third-party electronic records, loose sheets, WhatsApp messages and similar material were held unsustainable without independent corroboration, proof of ownership, and a demonstrated nexus or flow of funds to the assessee. Deduction under section 80IA(4) was also recognised for infrastructure work executed as a subcontractor, the governing test being the nature of the work rather than the formal chain of contract.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>