https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773680 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of Rs. 7,38,69,563/- addition under section 68 read with section 115BBE for unexplained cash credits. The assessee successfully established that disputed bank accounts belonged to M/s Sahara India, not to her, and she was merely an authorized signatory. The AO failed to prove beneficial ownership or any fund transfers to assessee's personal accounts. The CIT(A) correctly found that the assessee's PAN was erroneously linked to these accounts by bank officials instead of M/s Sahara India's PAN, and accepted documentary evidence including bank certificates and statements proving third-party ownership. en-us Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:36:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773680 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging deletion of Rs. 7,38,69,563/- addition under section 68 read with section 115BBE for unexplained cash credits. The assessee successfully established that disputed bank accounts belonged to M/s Sahara India, not to her, and she was merely an authorized signatory. The AO failed to prove beneficial ownership or any fund transfers to assessee's personal accounts. The CIT(A) correctly found that the assessee's PAN was erroneously linked to these accounts by bank officials instead of M/s Sahara India's PAN, and accepted documentary evidence including bank certificates and statements proving third-party ownership. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773680