<?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>2024 (3) TMI 881 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451100</link>
    <description>The ITAT Raipur held that the assessee company successfully discharged its onus under Section 68 regarding unexplained cash credits. The company provided comprehensive documentary evidence including investor confirmation, bank statements, income returns, financial statements, share application forms, PAN copies, and board resolutions to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant. The investor company had categorically furnished complete source details for the Rs. 2.05 crore investment. The AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or investigation before drawing adverse inferences and made no attempt to disprove the correctness of the assessee&#039;s explanation. The addition under Section 68 was deleted in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=747557" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 881 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451100</link>
      <description>The ITAT Raipur held that the assessee company successfully discharged its onus under Section 68 regarding unexplained cash credits. The company provided comprehensive documentary evidence including investor confirmation, bank statements, income returns, financial statements, share application forms, PAN copies, and board resolutions to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant. The investor company had categorically furnished complete source details for the Rs. 2.05 crore investment. The AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or investigation before drawing adverse inferences and made no attempt to disprove the correctness of the assessee&#039;s explanation. The addition under Section 68 was deleted in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451100</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>