https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379459 The Tribunal allowed both appeals, ruling in favor of the appellant. It held that the appellant had sufficiently established the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, rendering the addition of Rs. 7,34,000 unwarranted under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Additionally, as the basis for the penalty was deleted, the penalty of Rs. 2,26,972 was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of verifying information provided by the assessee and concluded that the burden of proof was met by the detailed submissions and evidence presented by the appellant. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 May 2019 09:00:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379459 The Tribunal allowed both appeals, ruling in favor of the appellant. It held that the appellant had sufficiently established the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, rendering the addition of Rs. 7,34,000 unwarranted under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Additionally, as the basis for the penalty was deleted, the penalty of Rs. 2,26,972 was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of verifying information provided by the assessee and concluded that the burden of proof was met by the detailed submissions and evidence presented by the appellant. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379459