{"id":63630,"date":"2026-08-03T23:13:12","date_gmt":"2026-08-03T17:43:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/harish-jain-v-asst-cit-2025-122-itr-640-174-taxmann-com-348-jaipurtrib\/"},"modified":"2026-08-03T23:13:12","modified_gmt":"2026-08-03T17:43:12","slug":"harish-jain-v-asst-cit-2025-122-itr-640-174-taxmann-com-348-jaipurtrib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/harish-jain-v-asst-cit-2025-122-itr-640-174-taxmann-com-348-jaipurtrib\/","title":{"rendered":"Harish Jain v. Asst. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 640 \/ 174 taxmann.com 348 (Jaipur)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Assessing Officer made an addition alleging payment of on-money for purchase of immovable property on the basis of the assessee&#8217;s statement recorded during search. The assessee subsequently retracted the statement and explained that the seller had ultimately sold the property to the assessee&#8217;s wife at a substantially lower consideration owing to financial distress. The Tribunal held that the subsequent agreement clearly referred to the earlier transaction and supported the assessee&#8217;s explanation. In the absence of any independent enquiry or incriminating material establishing payment of cash over and above the recorded consideration, no addition could be sustained merely on the basis of a retracted statement. The Assessing Officer made an addition on the basis of notings on the reverse of a seized rental agreement showing rent allegedly higher than that disclosed by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the assessee had already offered proportionate rental income in the relevant year and the balance in the subsequent year after termination of the agreement. As the Assessing Officer failed to controvert these facts, the addition was deleted.\u00a0 The assessee had initially admitted undisclosed investment in construction during search but later retracted the statement and explained that part of the amount had already been offered to tax in different assessment years. The Tribunal held that the balance addition was made solely on the basis of the retracted statement without any supporting evidence or valuation material. Since no corroborative evidence was brought on record, the addition was directed to be deleted<strong>\u00a0 (<\/strong>AY. 2012-13 &amp; 2014-15 to 2016-17).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Unexplained investment-Addition based solely on retracted statement-No corroborative evidence-Addition deleted-Rental income-Seized rental agreement-Income already offered to tax-Addition deleted-Unexplained investment-Cost of construction-Addition based only on retracted confession-No supporting evidence-Addition deleted.[S. 69, 132(4), 153D]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63630","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gyi","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63630","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=63630"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63630\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63631,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63630\/revisions\/63631"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63630"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63630"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63630"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}