<?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 980 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793599</link>
    <description>Addition for alleged on-money or unexplained investment in immovable property cannot rest solely on a seized loose sheet without independent corroboration. The Tribunal noted that the loose sheet was found in the seller&#039;s case, had already been treated as a dumb document, and no material showed payment over and above the registered sale consideration. Applying the principle that a registered document cannot be displaced by uncorroborated oral or hearsay material, it held that adverse inference could not be drawn from a standalone document without supporting evidence. The deletion of the addition was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 11:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 980 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793599</link>
      <description>Addition for alleged on-money or unexplained investment in immovable property cannot rest solely on a seized loose sheet without independent corroboration. The Tribunal noted that the loose sheet was found in the seller&#039;s case, had already been treated as a dumb document, and no material showed payment over and above the registered sale consideration. Applying the principle that a registered document cannot be displaced by uncorroborated oral or hearsay material, it held that adverse inference could not be drawn from a standalone document without supporting evidence. The deletion of the addition was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793599</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>