https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772116 The ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of addition u/s 68. The assessee received Rs. 3.5 crore as advance against property transaction, not loan, supported by sale agreement, cancellation deed, and banking records. The creditor was an income tax assessee with PAN who responded to summons u/s 133(6) and provided documentation. The AO failed to conduct independent inquiry or summon the notary public, making addition based on presumption rather than conclusive evidence. The assessee discharged its onus by establishing identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor through substantial documentation and banking channels. en-us Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jun 2025 08:40:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772116 The ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of addition u/s 68. The assessee received Rs. 3.5 crore as advance against property transaction, not loan, supported by sale agreement, cancellation deed, and banking records. The creditor was an income tax assessee with PAN who responded to summons u/s 133(6) and provided documentation. The AO failed to conduct independent inquiry or summon the notary public, making addition based on presumption rather than conclusive evidence. The assessee discharged its onus by establishing identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor through substantial documentation and banking channels. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772116