Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
ITAT held that the assessee was not a shell company, since the record showed regular corporate existence and business activity; the returned business loss could not be rejected on that basis and was allowed to be carried forward. On section 68, the assessee discharged the initial burden by producing lender-wise confirmations, bank statements, ledger accounts, affidavits and returns, while the Revenue failed to make any independent rebuttal; the Tribunal also noted that proof of source of source was not required for unsecured loans for AY 2018-19. The entire addition under section 68 was deleted. Once the bank credits were accepted as genuine, the separate addition for unexplained investment based on the same funds was unsustainable and was also deleted.
ITAT held that the assessee was not a shell company, since the record showed regular corporate existence and business activity; the returned business loss could not be rejected on that basis and was allowed to be carried forward. On section 68, the assessee discharged the initial burden by producing lender-wise confirmations, bank statements, ledger accounts, affidavits and returns, while the Revenue failed to make any independent rebuttal; the Tribunal also noted that proof of source of source was not required for unsecured loans for AY 2018-19. The entire addition under section 68 was deleted. Once the bank credits were accepted as genuine, the separate addition for unexplained investment based on the same funds was unsustainable and was also deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
