https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181540 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and rejecting the ground challenging the deletion of the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. The Tribunal held that once the identity of creditors is established and they confirm the credit, the burden shifts to the Revenue to disprove the transaction. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessee had discharged its onus, and the addition u/s 68 could not be sustained without evidence that the source of the creditor's deposit came from the assessee. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:33:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181540 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and rejecting the ground challenging the deletion of the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. The Tribunal held that once the identity of creditors is established and they confirm the credit, the burden shifts to the Revenue to disprove the transaction. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessee had discharged its onus, and the addition u/s 68 could not be sustained without evidence that the source of the creditor's deposit came from the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181540