https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57293 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletions of additions made by the AO. The additions on account of unaccounted investment in property and under-statement of sale consideration were deemed unjustified due to lack of concrete evidence and reliance on estimates. Similarly, the addition on account of low household withdrawals was deleted as the AO's estimation lacked material evidence. The decisions were based on the principle that tax assessments should be supported by substantial proof rather than conjecture. en-us Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Dec 2010 13:24:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57293 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletions of additions made by the AO. The additions on account of unaccounted investment in property and under-statement of sale consideration were deemed unjustified due to lack of concrete evidence and reliance on estimates. Similarly, the addition on account of low household withdrawals was deleted as the AO's estimation lacked material evidence. The decisions were based on the principle that tax assessments should be supported by substantial proof rather than conjecture. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57293