<?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 (10) TMI 420 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333400</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 1,05,00,000 under section 68. The Tribunal held that the assessee had proved the genuineness of the transaction, creditworthiness, and identity of the creditor, discharging the initial burden of proof. Other legal/technical issues raised were dismissed as infructuous, applying a previous decision. The appeals were allowed, and the AO was directed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444495" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 420 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333400</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 1,05,00,000 under section 68. The Tribunal held that the assessee had proved the genuineness of the transaction, creditworthiness, and identity of the creditor, discharging the initial burden of proof. Other legal/technical issues raised were dismissed as infructuous, applying a previous decision. The appeals were allowed, and the AO was directed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333400</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>