https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462185 ITAT Chennai allowed the appeal for AY 2010-11, setting aside additions under section 68 for bogus unsecured loans. The tribunal held that since the assessment was unabated on the search date (26.09.2012), no additions could be made under section 153A without incriminating material found during search. For AY 2011-12, the matter was remanded to AO for re-examination after the assessee failed to provide necessary evidence justifying loans from various persons. The tribunal directed verification of both years' unsecured loan claims considering the assessee's alleged involvement with accommodation entry providers and connection to Kolkata companies. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 May 2025 18:57:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462185 ITAT Chennai allowed the appeal for AY 2010-11, setting aside additions under section 68 for bogus unsecured loans. The tribunal held that since the assessment was unabated on the search date (26.09.2012), no additions could be made under section 153A without incriminating material found during search. For AY 2011-12, the matter was remanded to AO for re-examination after the assessee failed to provide necessary evidence justifying loans from various persons. The tribunal directed verification of both years' unsecured loan claims considering the assessee's alleged involvement with accommodation entry providers and connection to Kolkata companies. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462185