<?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>2023 (11) TMI 943 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446052</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal regarding disallowances of unsecured loans from 8 parties and unverifiable purchases. The AO had accepted purchase and sale transactions but rejected corresponding outstandings, considering purchase creditors bogus based solely on non-response to verification letters under Section 133(6). The ITAT found no rationale in accepting purchases/sales while rejecting related outstandings, noting the AO took a shorter route without proper verification. The AO&#039;s comments about illegible ITR and difficult-to-read bank statements were deemed insufficient grounds for rejection. The appellate authority properly considered available material and allowed the appeal, which revenue contested only on technicalities regarding additional evidence rather than merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 943 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446052</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal regarding disallowances of unsecured loans from 8 parties and unverifiable purchases. The AO had accepted purchase and sale transactions but rejected corresponding outstandings, considering purchase creditors bogus based solely on non-response to verification letters under Section 133(6). The ITAT found no rationale in accepting purchases/sales while rejecting related outstandings, noting the AO took a shorter route without proper verification. The AO&#039;s comments about illegible ITR and difficult-to-read bank statements were deemed insufficient grounds for rejection. The appellate authority properly considered available material and allowed the appeal, which revenue contested only on technicalities regarding additional evidence rather than merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>