<?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 2142 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470559</link>
    <description>Section 153C requires seized money, assets, books or documents relating to the other person, a recorded satisfaction that such material bears on total income, and its transmission to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. For completed assessments, additions under the search-assessment regime must be based on incriminating material connected with the search. Where no seized document or other material evidenced unaccounted construction expenditure and the prescribed satisfaction procedure was not disclosed, a Departmental Valuation Officer&#039;s report alone could not support an unexplained-investment addition under section 69B. The article states that such additions were unsustainable.</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=914456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 2142 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470559</link>
      <description>Section 153C requires seized money, assets, books or documents relating to the other person, a recorded satisfaction that such material bears on total income, and its transmission to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. For completed assessments, additions under the search-assessment regime must be based on incriminating material connected with the search. Where no seized document or other material evidenced unaccounted construction expenditure and the prescribed satisfaction procedure was not disclosed, a Departmental Valuation Officer&#039;s report alone could not support an unexplained-investment addition under section 69B. The article states that such additions were unsustainable.</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=470559</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>