https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794073 A retracted survey statement under Section 133A could not, by itself, sustain income-tax additions where the diary entries were unsupported by independent corroborative evidence; the HC upheld the finding that the material was unreliable and the disputed additions failed. Where the same diary recorded both receipts and payments of unaccounted funds, telescopic credit had to be applied so the same money was not taxed twice; the restricted addition was therefore not sustained. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order and dismissed the Revenue's appeals, leaving the relief to the assessee undisturbed. en-us Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jun 2026 09:28:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794073 A retracted survey statement under Section 133A could not, by itself, sustain income-tax additions where the diary entries were unsupported by independent corroborative evidence; the HC upheld the finding that the material was unreliable and the disputed additions failed. Where the same diary recorded both receipts and payments of unaccounted funds, telescopic credit had to be applied so the same money was not taxed twice; the restricted addition was therefore not sustained. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order and dismissed the Revenue's appeals, leaving the relief to the assessee undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794073