<?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 (12) TMI 985 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416219</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, quashing the CIT(A)&#039;s order that deleted an addition of Rs. 4,10,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the creditors, and genuineness of the transactions adequately. Consequently, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld, increasing the assessee&#039;s total income by the aforementioned amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2021 20:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=664923" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 985 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416219</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, quashing the CIT(A)&#039;s order that deleted an addition of Rs. 4,10,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the creditors, and genuineness of the transactions adequately. Consequently, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld, increasing the assessee&#039;s total income by the aforementioned amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416219</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>