Topic

Unexplained Investments

2 articlesLatest July 2026
Section 69A IT Act | Mere Mobile Phone Estimates Without Corroborative Evidence Insufficient for Unexplained Investment Addition : ITAT Jaipur
Case Law Analysis
|Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Section 69A IT Act | Mere Mobile Phone Estimates Without Corroborative Evidence Insufficient for Unexplained Investment Addition : ITAT Jaipur

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.

Section 69A Income Tax Act | Fraudulent PAN Misuse Requires De Novo Adjudication on Unexplained Investments: ITAT Delhi
Case Law Analysis
|Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Section 69A Income Tax Act | Fraudulent PAN Misuse Requires De Novo Adjudication on Unexplained Investments: ITAT Delhi

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.

Continue exploring