<?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 732 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329023</link>
    <description>Gift claims must be supported by the donor&#039;s capacity and the immediate source of funds; the alleged cash gift from the assessee&#039;s mother was not accepted because she had no independent income and the source of the amount was not shown, so the addition was sustained. Unsecured loan credits were treated as unexplained cash credits because the assessee failed to prove the creditors&#039; identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions, and the addition under section 68 was upheld. Estimated addition for low household withdrawals was also sustained on the basis that the disclosed expenses were inadequate. However, where land was purchased jointly by the assessee and his wife, the unexplained share of the co-owner could not be assessed in the assessee&#039;s hands, so that addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 732 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329023</link>
      <description>Gift claims must be supported by the donor&#039;s capacity and the immediate source of funds; the alleged cash gift from the assessee&#039;s mother was not accepted because she had no independent income and the source of the amount was not shown, so the addition was sustained. Unsecured loan credits were treated as unexplained cash credits because the assessee failed to prove the creditors&#039; identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions, and the addition under section 68 was upheld. Estimated addition for low household withdrawals was also sustained on the basis that the disclosed expenses were inadequate. However, where land was purchased jointly by the assessee and his wife, the unexplained share of the co-owner could not be assessed in the assessee&#039;s hands, so that addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>