https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773349 The ITAT Raipur allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes in a case involving Section 68 assessment regarding unsecured loans. The assessee had provided balance sheets and financial documents of lenders as additional evidence through Form 35 to establish identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. However, the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC failed to consider this additional evidence under Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules. The ITAT held that the CIT(Appeals) order was perverse as it did not examine relevant evidence or call for a remand report from the AO, violating principles of natural justice for quasi-judicial authorities. en-us Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jun 2025 08:28:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773349 The ITAT Raipur allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes in a case involving Section 68 assessment regarding unsecured loans. The assessee had provided balance sheets and financial documents of lenders as additional evidence through Form 35 to establish identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. However, the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC failed to consider this additional evidence under Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules. The ITAT held that the CIT(Appeals) order was perverse as it did not examine relevant evidence or call for a remand report from the AO, violating principles of natural justice for quasi-judicial authorities. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773349