https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775734 The ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 regarding capital introduced by a partner was not sustainable as the amount was duly recorded in the partners' books and confirmed by them. The tribunal emphasized that suspicion alone cannot replace evidence, referencing precedent that strong suspicion is insufficient for disallowance. Since the capital introduction was reflected in the assessee's books since 2012 and no cross-examination of the confirming parties occurred, the addition was disallowed. The appeal of the assessee was allowed. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Jul 2025 08:21:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775734 The ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 regarding capital introduced by a partner was not sustainable as the amount was duly recorded in the partners' books and confirmed by them. The tribunal emphasized that suspicion alone cannot replace evidence, referencing precedent that strong suspicion is insufficient for disallowance. Since the capital introduction was reflected in the assessee's books since 2012 and no cross-examination of the confirming parties occurred, the addition was disallowed. The appeal of the assessee was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775734