https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283598 The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under section 41(1) due to the lack of confirmation for unsecured loans, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the absence of explicit remission of liability and debiting to profit & loss account in preceding years. The deletion of expenses under section 37(1) was partially allowed by the CIT(A), with the matter remitted back to the AO for further examination. The Revenue's appeal was partly allowed, affirming the decision on the addition under section 41(1 and remitting the expenses issue back to the AO for review. en-us Wed, 10 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:18:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283598 The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under section 41(1) due to the lack of confirmation for unsecured loans, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the absence of explicit remission of liability and debiting to profit & loss account in preceding years. The deletion of expenses under section 37(1) was partially allowed by the CIT(A), with the matter remitted back to the AO for further examination. The Revenue's appeal was partly allowed, affirming the decision on the addition under section 41(1 and remitting the expenses issue back to the AO for review. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283598