<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1604 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196378</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, regarding unsecured loans received by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the assessee had proven the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeals for both assessment years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:25:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1604 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196378</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, regarding unsecured loans received by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the assessee had proven the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeals for both assessment years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>