<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (4) TMI 519 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118051</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the loans were genuine, the creditors&#039; identity and creditworthiness were proven, and there was no basis for treating the loans as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, both the addition of unexplained credit and the disallowance of interest paid were deleted, resulting in the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:34:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155048" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 519 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118051</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the loans were genuine, the creditors&#039; identity and creditworthiness were proven, and there was no basis for treating the loans as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, both the addition of unexplained credit and the disallowance of interest paid were deleted, resulting in the allowance of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118051</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>