<?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>2019 (12) TMI 1633 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306341</link>
    <description>Section 68 addition in respect of loans from related lender companies was found unsustainable where the assessee produced audited accounts, bank statements, confirmations, lender assessment orders and evidence of the source of funds. The lenders were income-tax assessees, the loans were routed through account payee cheques and reflected in their books, which satisfied the tests of identity of creditor, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness. Once these primary facts were established, the burden shifted to the Revenue, which did not disprove the documents or show that the funds actually belonged to the assessee. The remaining disputed addition was deleted and the relief granted by the CIT(A) was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2023 18:51:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=702530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 1633 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306341</link>
      <description>Section 68 addition in respect of loans from related lender companies was found unsustainable where the assessee produced audited accounts, bank statements, confirmations, lender assessment orders and evidence of the source of funds. The lenders were income-tax assessees, the loans were routed through account payee cheques and reflected in their books, which satisfied the tests of identity of creditor, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness. Once these primary facts were established, the burden shifted to the Revenue, which did not disprove the documents or show that the funds actually belonged to the assessee. The remaining disputed addition was deleted and the relief granted by the CIT(A) was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306341</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>