<?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 1104 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775036</link>
    <description>The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes regarding addition of unsecured loan as unexplained income under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The tribunal found that additional evidence could not be filed before lower authorities as the relevant letters and repayment occurred after their orders. While the assessee had filed an MOU dated 07.12.2021 and affidavit before lower authorities, the AO failed to examine the affiant despite the filed affidavit. The lower authorities relied solely on seized documents for making the addition without proper examination. Following precedent from another case, the tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication, noting that proper examination of evidence was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 08:22:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=836944" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1104 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775036</link>
      <description>The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes regarding addition of unsecured loan as unexplained income under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The tribunal found that additional evidence could not be filed before lower authorities as the relevant letters and repayment occurred after their orders. While the assessee had filed an MOU dated 07.12.2021 and affidavit before lower authorities, the AO failed to examine the affiant despite the filed affidavit. The lower authorities relied solely on seized documents for making the addition without proper examination. Following precedent from another case, the tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication, noting that proper examination of evidence was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>