https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447819 Addition under Section 68 was sustained because the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of an unsecured loan agreement from a private company; the agreement's terms (no interest obligation, vague repayment on mutually agreed terms) and absence of supporting evidence left the initial onus unmet, so the income was added. The court rejected the contention that the AO should have issued notices to the struck off lender as futile given non availability of material. The Tribunal's view that remission principles did not apply was affirmed because no legally enforceable liability had arisen to be remitted. Decision adverse to the assessee. en-us Mon, 18 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Feb 2026 15:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447819 Addition under Section 68 was sustained because the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of an unsecured loan agreement from a private company; the agreement's terms (no interest obligation, vague repayment on mutually agreed terms) and absence of supporting evidence left the initial onus unmet, so the income was added. The court rejected the contention that the AO should have issued notices to the struck off lender as futile given non availability of material. The Tribunal's view that remission principles did not apply was affirmed because no legally enforceable liability had arisen to be remitted. Decision adverse to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447819