2025 (8) TMI 919 - SCH - Income Tax

Addition under section 68 requiring proof of investor creditworthiness and genuineness upheld; Supreme Court dismisses appeals

Addition under section 68 was challenged on the ground that mere identity of the investor discharges the assessee's onus. The court held that identity ... Addition u/s 68 - creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions not proved - ITAT deleted addition - HC [2025 (3) TMI 1519 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held mere identity of the investor or a creditor does not result in the onus of proof being discharged. The assessee is additionally obliged to establish the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and thus prove that the entities making the payment had the capacity and the means HELD THAT:- We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. The Supreme Court, after considering the submissions and materials on record, declined to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. The Court concluded that there was no sufficient ground to warrant intervention. Consequently, the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of. The judgment underscores the principle that appellate interference is unwarranted absent a demonstrable error or miscarriage of justice in the High Court's order.