https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767994 Additions for unexplained cash credit under s.68 were examined where the taxpayer received a loan from a corporate lender. The Tribunal held that mere suspicion of accommodation entries is insufficient when identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness are evidenced, including the lender's adequate financial standing and its return reflecting the transaction; crucially, subsequent repayment of the loan negated any inference of disguised income and satisfied the taxpayer's primary onus. Consequently, the s.68 addition was deleted. As the loan trail and repayment were proved, the related estimated addition for unexplained expenditure under s.69C, being derivative and unsupported on facts, was also deleted; the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 10:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767994 Additions for unexplained cash credit under s.68 were examined where the taxpayer received a loan from a corporate lender. The Tribunal held that mere suspicion of accommodation entries is insufficient when identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness are evidenced, including the lender's adequate financial standing and its return reflecting the transaction; crucially, subsequent repayment of the loan negated any inference of disguised income and satisfied the taxpayer's primary onus. Consequently, the s.68 addition was deleted. As the loan trail and repayment were proved, the related estimated addition for unexplained expenditure under s.69C, being derivative and unsupported on facts, was also deleted; the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767994