https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762385 ITAT Delhi remitted matter back to AO for determining peak credits under section 68 after assessees failed to follow tribunal's earlier directions to demonstrate transaction chains and prove credits. The tribunal clarified that burden of proof lies on assessees to establish layering calculations and legitimacy of each credit entry. AO was directed to assess commission income at 0.50% of accommodation entries provided and allow consequential relief. The tribunal found no fault with CIT(A)'s findings regarding seized investment documents that remained unexplained by assessees. en-us Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Nov 2024 16:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762385 ITAT Delhi remitted matter back to AO for determining peak credits under section 68 after assessees failed to follow tribunal's earlier directions to demonstrate transaction chains and prove credits. The tribunal clarified that burden of proof lies on assessees to establish layering calculations and legitimacy of each credit entry. AO was directed to assess commission income at 0.50% of accommodation entries provided and allow consequential relief. The tribunal found no fault with CIT(A)'s findings regarding seized investment documents that remained unexplained by assessees. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762385