https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469868 An addition under section 69A was partly deleted where the cash flow statement contained a computational error from duplicating a negative opening balance, as the mistake did not represent a real unexplained source. The claimed rental advance was rejected because no rent agreement, tenant details, or supporting vouchers were produced, so that portion of the addition was sustained. Cash withdrawals from the partner's firm were accepted as explained because the firm's records showed sufficient withdrawals and the cash nexus was established. Contributions by the assessee's husband and his HUF for agricultural land purchase were also accepted as explained sources on the basis of confirmations, financial statements, and return disclosures, resulting in partial relief. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jul 2026 21:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469868 An addition under section 69A was partly deleted where the cash flow statement contained a computational error from duplicating a negative opening balance, as the mistake did not represent a real unexplained source. The claimed rental advance was rejected because no rent agreement, tenant details, or supporting vouchers were produced, so that portion of the addition was sustained. Cash withdrawals from the partner's firm were accepted as explained because the firm's records showed sufficient withdrawals and the cash nexus was established. Contributions by the assessee's husband and his HUF for agricultural land purchase were also accepted as explained sources on the basis of confirmations, financial statements, and return disclosures, resulting in partial relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469868