<?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 (6) TMI 1472 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773359</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeals across AYs 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 challenging disallowance of expenditure under section 37(1) on grounds of alleged bogus creditors. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions totaling Rs. 3,32,86,216/-, finding that creditors responded to section 133(6) notices, confirmed transactions, filed returns declaring income from assessee, and assessee deducted TDS with proper documentation. Despite field enquiries revealing absence of signboards at creditor premises, the Tribunal held this insufficient to establish bogus nature without concrete adverse evidence. The court emphasized that mere suspicion cannot justify disallowance when statutory compliances are met and creditors offer income to tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2025 08:29:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830637" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1472 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773359</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeals across AYs 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 challenging disallowance of expenditure under section 37(1) on grounds of alleged bogus creditors. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions totaling Rs. 3,32,86,216/-, finding that creditors responded to section 133(6) notices, confirmed transactions, filed returns declaring income from assessee, and assessee deducted TDS with proper documentation. Despite field enquiries revealing absence of signboards at creditor premises, the Tribunal held this insufficient to establish bogus nature without concrete adverse evidence. The court emphasized that mere suspicion cannot justify disallowance when statutory compliances are met and creditors offer income to tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773359</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>