Assessee acquired residential flat jointly with his mother and brother. He was asked to explain source of this investment. Assessee claimed that he obtained loan from his mother and brother. AO doubted creditworthiness of assessee’s mother and thus, concluded that investment remained unexplained to the extent of loan taken from assessee’s mother. Assessee contended that his mother’s case was also reopened to examine the same investment and her returned income was accepted without doubting her creditworthiness. Assessees mother was also co-owner of flat. Revenue was required to assess the unexplained investment made directly or indirectly in the flat in the hands of respective co-owners, if their creditworthiness was doubtful. Since, during the reopened assessment proceedings, Asstt. CIT had already held that the assessees mother had creditworthiness for making investment and advances in the relevant year, her creditworthiness did not remain questionable.  Addition is deleted .   [AY.  2012-13]