<?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>Tribunal Confirms Loan Deletion Due to Adequate Evidence, Dismisses Revenue&#039;s Appeal on Unsecured Loans and Share Application.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76732</link>
    <description>Additions on account of Bogus unsecured loans and bogus share capital money - Revenue argued that the unsecured loan from entities controlled by a hawala operator should be treated as accommodation entries and assessed as the assessee&#039;s own income. - The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to establish the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the lenders. Despite the AO&#039;s reliance on statements from the hawala operator, the Tribunal noted that such statements were recorded without the assessee&#039;s opportunity for cross-examination. As the assessee had fulfilled the burden of proof u/s 68, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of the unsecured loan. - Furthermore, it .....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:22:53 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:22:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750531" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal Confirms Loan Deletion Due to Adequate Evidence, Dismisses Revenue&#039;s Appeal on Unsecured Loans and Share Application.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76732</link>
      <description>Additions on account of Bogus unsecured loans and bogus share capital money - Revenue argued that the unsecured loan from entities controlled by a hawala operator should be treated as accommodation entries and assessed as the assessee&#039;s own income. - The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to establish the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the lenders. Despite the AO&#039;s reliance on statements from the hawala operator, the Tribunal noted that such statements were recorded without the assessee&#039;s opportunity for cross-examination. As the assessee had fulfilled the burden of proof u/s 68, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of the unsecured loan. - Furthermore, it .....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:22:53 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>