<?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>2025 (3) TMI 2145 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470562</link>
    <description>Uncorroborated third-party statements, loose sheets and unsupported valuation assumptions could not establish undisclosed property consideration or unaccounted bad debts. Additions relating to alleged cash payments for several properties were deleted where sellers were not examined, statements were unavailable for cross-examination, or documentary and valuation evidence supported the recorded consideration. For one property, the addition was restricted to the differential consideration proportionate to the land actually conveyed. A documented sale agreement showing cash paid beyond the registered deed supported retention of that cash component. Protective additions in the spouse&#039;s assessment could not continue once corresponding substantive additions were addressed in the other assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:27:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 2145 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470562</link>
      <description>Uncorroborated third-party statements, loose sheets and unsupported valuation assumptions could not establish undisclosed property consideration or unaccounted bad debts. Additions relating to alleged cash payments for several properties were deleted where sellers were not examined, statements were unavailable for cross-examination, or documentary and valuation evidence supported the recorded consideration. For one property, the addition was restricted to the differential consideration proportionate to the land actually conveyed. A documented sale agreement showing cash paid beyond the registered deed supported retention of that cash component. Protective additions in the spouse&#039;s assessment could not continue once corresponding substantive additions were addressed in the other assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>