<?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>2016 (6) TMI 92 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328383</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by a partnership firm in a transport business for the assessment year 2008-09. The firm failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of loan transactions totaling Rs. 15 lakhs from four parties, leading to additions under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Despite submitting confirmation letters and proofs of income, discrepancies in bank statements raised doubts. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, emphasizing the firm&#039;s failure to discharge the burden of proof required by section 68. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were deemed appropriate, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:36:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 92 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328383</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by a partnership firm in a transport business for the assessment year 2008-09. The firm failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of loan transactions totaling Rs. 15 lakhs from four parties, leading to additions under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Despite submitting confirmation letters and proofs of income, discrepancies in bank statements raised doubts. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, emphasizing the firm&#039;s failure to discharge the burden of proof required by section 68. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were deemed appropriate, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>