https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183336 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the firm had established the genuineness of the credits and the identity of the creditor. The addition of unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was deleted, emphasizing that the partner's funds were transferred through the bank and his investments were accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal found the partner's capital introduction legitimate, and the firm was not required to prove the source of funds in a third party's hands. The order was pronounced in open court on 17th April 2015. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jun 2016 11:27:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183336 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the firm had established the genuineness of the credits and the identity of the creditor. The addition of unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was deleted, emphasizing that the partner's funds were transferred through the bank and his investments were accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal found the partner's capital introduction legitimate, and the firm was not required to prove the source of funds in a third party's hands. The order was pronounced in open court on 17th April 2015. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183336