#Income Tax Act Section 69A

ITAT Jaipur holds that rough estimates of jewellery purchases found on a mobile phone, without proof of actual transactions or physical possession, cannot justify additions under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The ruling reinforces strict evidentiary standards for unexplained investments, protecting assessees from double taxation based on loose notings.

ITAT Surat holds that cash withdrawals from disclosed bank accounts cannot be treated as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act unless there is evidence linking such withdrawals to undisclosed income. The ruling underscores that mere cash withdrawals, without proof of unaccounted sources, do not justify tax additions, reinforcing the need for concrete evidence in best judgment assessments.

ITAT Delhi remands a case for fresh adjudication under Section 69A after finding fraudulent third-party misuse of the assessee’s PAN, limiting tax liability to just 1% commission income. The ruling underscores the need for proper assessment of unexplained investments before imposing penalties, offering relief to taxpayers facing wrongful additions due to identity fraud.