https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468976 Separate additions for committee-related investments could not be sustained where the same amounts were already covered by income accepted in settlement proceedings or by an opening balance on which tax had been paid. The Tribunal noted that the seized diary entries, including an additional entry of Rs. 5 lakh, required verification against the opening balance reflected in the seized material and against the income disclosed before the Settlement Commission. The Assessing Officer was directed to verify whether the disputed investments were already subsumed in the taxed settlement income or opening balance; only then could a fresh addition be made. Conditional relief was therefore granted on the investment additions. en-us Tue, 08 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 May 2026 13:19:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468976 Separate additions for committee-related investments could not be sustained where the same amounts were already covered by income accepted in settlement proceedings or by an opening balance on which tax had been paid. The Tribunal noted that the seized diary entries, including an additional entry of Rs. 5 lakh, required verification against the opening balance reflected in the seized material and against the income disclosed before the Settlement Commission. The Assessing Officer was directed to verify whether the disputed investments were already subsumed in the taxed settlement income or opening balance; only then could a fresh addition be made. Conditional relief was therefore granted on the investment additions. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468976