https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767888 The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to the outdated email address used for communication, which was not the fault of the assessee. Regarding the unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, the court found that the assessee provided sufficient evidence to shift the burden of proof to the tax authorities. The authorities failed to substantiate their claims with specific evidence. Consequently, the court directed the Assessing Officer to delete the Rs. 90,00,000/- addition, concluding it was unjustified. en-us Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:36:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767888 The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to the outdated email address used for communication, which was not the fault of the assessee. Regarding the unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, the court found that the assessee provided sufficient evidence to shift the burden of proof to the tax authorities. The authorities failed to substantiate their claims with specific evidence. Consequently, the court directed the Assessing Officer to delete the Rs. 90,00,000/- addition, concluding it was unjustified. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767888