<?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>Creditworthiness of loan creditors upheld, interest on unsecured loan allowed based on cited precedents.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84398</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the deletion of addition u/s 68 regarding the genuineness, creditworthiness, and transactions of loan creditors, relying on the orders of Ambe Tradecorp (P.) Ltd. [2022 (7) TMI 902 - Gujarat HC] and Sandip Kumar Gupta [2024 (7) TMI 1574 - ITAT Kolkata]. The loan amount was duly repaid during the assessment year, and the assessee was not the beneficial owner. The assessee provided evidence acknowledged by the CIT(A), ruling out contraventions of Section 68 regarding identity, creditworthiness, and banking channel transactions. The ITAT also upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on interest on the alleged unsecured loan, following the same principle laid down in the cited orders. The appeal was decided against the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:21 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=785050" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Creditworthiness of loan creditors upheld, interest on unsecured loan allowed based on cited precedents.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84398</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the deletion of addition u/s 68 regarding the genuineness, creditworthiness, and transactions of loan creditors, relying on the orders of Ambe Tradecorp (P.) Ltd. [2022 (7) TMI 902 - Gujarat HC] and Sandip Kumar Gupta [2024 (7) TMI 1574 - ITAT Kolkata]. The loan amount was duly repaid during the assessment year, and the assessee was not the beneficial owner. The assessee provided evidence acknowledged by the CIT(A), ruling out contraventions of Section 68 regarding identity, creditworthiness, and banking channel transactions. The ITAT also upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on interest on the alleged unsecured loan, following the same principle laid down in the cited orders. The appeal was decided against the revenue.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:21 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84398</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>