<?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>2025 (5) TMI 1857 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771585</link>
    <description>Unsecured loans supported by creditor confirmations, ledger extracts and bank statements could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under section 68 where the creditors were tax-assessed and repayments were recorded in the remand report. The assessee discharged the burden by proving the creditors&#039; identity and the receipt of funds, and the addition could not rest only on third-party statements or suspicion without independent enquiry or contrary material. As the loan addition failed, the consequential disallowance of interest on those loans also could not survive, since its basis was solely the alleged bogus nature of the borrowing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 May 2025 13:15:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1857 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771585</link>
      <description>Unsecured loans supported by creditor confirmations, ledger extracts and bank statements could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under section 68 where the creditors were tax-assessed and repayments were recorded in the remand report. The assessee discharged the burden by proving the creditors&#039; identity and the receipt of funds, and the addition could not rest only on third-party statements or suspicion without independent enquiry or contrary material. As the loan addition failed, the consequential disallowance of interest on those loans also could not survive, since its basis was solely the alleged bogus nature of the borrowing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>