<?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>2021 (4) TMI 204 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406088</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of an unsecured loan as unexplained cash credit. The additional evidence submitted by the assessee, including ledger accounts, bank statements, and balance confirmations, explained the source of the loan. The ITAT found that the Assessing Officer did not disprove this evidence, leading to the conclusion that the CIT(A) was unjustified in upholding the addition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2021 08:51:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=640985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 204 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406088</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of an unsecured loan as unexplained cash credit. The additional evidence submitted by the assessee, including ledger accounts, bank statements, and balance confirmations, explained the source of the loan. The ITAT found that the Assessing Officer did not disprove this evidence, leading to the conclusion that the CIT(A) was unjustified in upholding the addition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>