https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373531 ITAT Jaipur ruled in favor of the assessee in an assessment under section 153A regarding addition under section 68. The Assessing Officer alleged accommodation entries but failed to identify discrepancies in documentary evidence including bank statements and creditor financial statements. The tribunal held that statements recorded under section 132(4) cannot be considered incriminating material and cannot override valid documentary evidence. Since loan transactions were properly documented through banking channels with TDS on interest payments, establishing creditor identity, capacity and genuineness, the CIT(A)'s deletion of addition was upheld. en-us Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Jan 2025 21:48:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373531 ITAT Jaipur ruled in favor of the assessee in an assessment under section 153A regarding addition under section 68. The Assessing Officer alleged accommodation entries but failed to identify discrepancies in documentary evidence including bank statements and creditor financial statements. The tribunal held that statements recorded under section 132(4) cannot be considered incriminating material and cannot override valid documentary evidence. Since loan transactions were properly documented through banking channels with TDS on interest payments, establishing creditor identity, capacity and genuineness, the CIT(A)'s deletion of addition was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373531