2025 (6) TMI 418 - SCH - Income Tax

Addition under Section 68 for disputed unsecured loan genuineness; petition dismissed upholding HC and Tribunal findings.

Addition under Section 68 arose because the assessing officer doubted the genuineness of an alleged unsecured term loan; the High Court held the assessee ... Addition u/s 68 - AO doubted the genuineness of the loan transaction and hence added the amount to the income of the appellant/assessee - loan agreement is titled “unsecured term loan agreement” - as decided by HC [2024 (1) TMI 218 - DELHI HIGH COURT] initial onus was not discharged by the appellant/assessee. Besides this, the argument advanced that since there was remission of liability Section 41(1) of the Act would apply and not the provisions of Section 68 as rightly held by the Tribunal, is an untenable submission. Since the genuineness of the loan transaction was doubted, no liability, in law, fructified requiring remission HELD THAT:- After hearing for the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned passed by the High Court. The present petition is, accordingly, dismissed. The Supreme Court, in a partial bench comprising Hon'ble Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Augustine George Masih, after hearing counsel for the petitioner, 'condoned delay' but declined to interfere with the impugned High Court order. The petition was 'dismissed,' and all pending applications were disposed of.