<?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 (7) TMI 520 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774452</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against an assessment order passed under section 153C based on documents seized from third party JBL. During a search operation at Jindal Bullion Ltd, digital data from &quot;Hazir Johri&quot; software was seized, containing a ledger allegedly pertaining to the assessee. The AO made additions based on statements recorded under section 132(4) and assumed the assessee provided accommodation entries. The ITAT held that since the software was seized from JBL&#039;s premises and contained transactions of various unrelated parties, with no concrete evidence linking the assessee to specific transactions, no addition could be made. Following coordinate bench precedents, the tribunal deleted the additions made on assumptions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2025 08:50:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 520 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774452</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against an assessment order passed under section 153C based on documents seized from third party JBL. During a search operation at Jindal Bullion Ltd, digital data from &quot;Hazir Johri&quot; software was seized, containing a ledger allegedly pertaining to the assessee. The AO made additions based on statements recorded under section 132(4) and assumed the assessee provided accommodation entries. The ITAT held that since the software was seized from JBL&#039;s premises and contained transactions of various unrelated parties, with no concrete evidence linking the assessee to specific transactions, no addition could be made. Following coordinate bench precedents, the tribunal deleted the additions made on assumptions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>