<?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 (4) TMI 2001 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471492</link>
    <description>Section 69A does not permit assessment of a carried-forward opening balance as current-year unexplained money where seized material shows no introduction of funds during the relevant year and no independent evidence establishes a current-year investment. Extracts drawn from seized FoxPro books already available to the Assessing Officer are not fresh evidence requiring compliance with Rule 46A. Further, loose-sheet entries recording alleged deposits do not constitute money, bullion, jewellery, or another valuable article whose ownership is required for section 69A. Consequently, the addition for the alleged unaccounted deposit was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2026 21:31:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=921120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 2001 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471492</link>
      <description>Section 69A does not permit assessment of a carried-forward opening balance as current-year unexplained money where seized material shows no introduction of funds during the relevant year and no independent evidence establishes a current-year investment. Extracts drawn from seized FoxPro books already available to the Assessing Officer are not fresh evidence requiring compliance with Rule 46A. Further, loose-sheet entries recording alleged deposits do not constitute money, bullion, jewellery, or another valuable article whose ownership is required for section 69A. Consequently, the addition for the alleged unaccounted deposit was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>