<?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>2022 (10) TMI 1146 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306267</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,00,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficiently proven the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the revenue&#039;s appeal. The burden was shifted to the revenue to disprove the evidence provided by the assessee, which was not done.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2023 08:36:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=702099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 1146 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306267</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,00,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficiently proven the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the revenue&#039;s appeal. The burden was shifted to the revenue to disprove the evidence provided by the assessee, which was not done.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306267</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>