<?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 (12) TMI 1678 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198365</link>
    <description>The Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the deletion of an addition of Rs. 5,12,50,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act was dismissed. The CIT(A) upheld the deletion, citing the established identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the loan transactions supported by various documents. The Tribunal affirmed the decision, emphasizing the lack of contrary evidence from the tax authorities to disprove the legitimacy of the loans.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2018 08:26:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506533" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1678 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198365</link>
      <description>The Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the deletion of an addition of Rs. 5,12,50,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act was dismissed. The CIT(A) upheld the deletion, citing the established identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the loan transactions supported by various documents. The Tribunal affirmed the decision, emphasizing the lack of contrary evidence from the tax authorities to disprove the legitimacy of the loans.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>