<?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 (6) TMI 328 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792947</link>
    <description>Agricultural income exemption under section 10(1) and an unexplained investment addition under section 69 were both discussed as issues requiring verification rather than final determination. The text notes that supporting bills, invoices and other material were produced, but ownership and agricultural use of land were not fully evidenced before the lower authorities, and grievance was raised that inquiry material had not been confronted. It also records that additional documents explaining the source of funds for property purchases were not examined by the Assessing Officer. The stated principle is that where material evidence is not properly confronted or additional evidence needs verification, the matter should be restored for fresh adjudication after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905812" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 328 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792947</link>
      <description>Agricultural income exemption under section 10(1) and an unexplained investment addition under section 69 were both discussed as issues requiring verification rather than final determination. The text notes that supporting bills, invoices and other material were produced, but ownership and agricultural use of land were not fully evidenced before the lower authorities, and grievance was raised that inquiry material had not been confronted. It also records that additional documents explaining the source of funds for property purchases were not examined by the Assessing Officer. The stated principle is that where material evidence is not properly confronted or additional evidence needs verification, the matter should be restored for fresh adjudication after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>