https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759824 The ITAT Jaipur held that addition under section 41(1) for cessation of trading liabilities was unjustified where the AO made the addition merely because notices under sections 133(6)/131 were not responded to. The tribunal found that the assessee had not received any benefit from remission or cessation of liability, and the amount remained shown as liability in books. Following the HC precedent in Narendra Mohan Mathur case, the tribunal emphasized that the onus is on the AO to definitively prove that liabilities ceased to exist during the relevant previous year, which was not established. The addition was directed to be deleted. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Oct 2024 14:42:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759824 The ITAT Jaipur held that addition under section 41(1) for cessation of trading liabilities was unjustified where the AO made the addition merely because notices under sections 133(6)/131 were not responded to. The tribunal found that the assessee had not received any benefit from remission or cessation of liability, and the amount remained shown as liability in books. Following the HC precedent in Narendra Mohan Mathur case, the tribunal emphasized that the onus is on the AO to definitively prove that liabilities ceased to exist during the relevant previous year, which was not established. The addition was directed to be deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759824