<?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>2023 (10) TMI 1473 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459525</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Ld CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the AO to delete the Rs. 25.00 lakhs addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal concluded that the AO failed to prove the loan was an accommodation entry, as the assessee had discharged the initial burden of proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=783191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1473 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459525</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Ld CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the AO to delete the Rs. 25.00 lakhs addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal concluded that the AO failed to prove the loan was an accommodation entry, as the assessee had discharged the initial burden of proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>