https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218077 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 50,00,000 as income from other sources under section 56(2)(vi), ruling that the amount received from HUF was recorded as a liability in the balance sheet and was repaid. Additionally, the ITAT agreed with the CIT(A) in disallowing the Rs. 1,50,000 claimed as capital expenditure, determining it was for facilitating sales, not for designing equipment. The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, affirming the decisions of the CIT(A) on both issues. en-us Thu, 24 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Nov 2012 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218077 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 50,00,000 as income from other sources under section 56(2)(vi), ruling that the amount received from HUF was recorded as a liability in the balance sheet and was repaid. Additionally, the ITAT agreed with the CIT(A) in disallowing the Rs. 1,50,000 claimed as capital expenditure, determining it was for facilitating sales, not for designing equipment. The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, affirming the decisions of the CIT(A) on both issues. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218077