<?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 (9) TMI 428 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777939</link>
    <description>ITAT held that additions under s.68 for unexplained cash credits must be deleted where the assessee discharged the onus by producing documents, clarifications, corrigenda and confirmations regarding unsecured loans. The Tribunal found both lower authorities erred in appreciating the record, set aside the CIT(A) order, directed the AO to delete the additions to income, and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2025 13:09:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=848816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 428 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777939</link>
      <description>ITAT held that additions under s.68 for unexplained cash credits must be deleted where the assessee discharged the onus by producing documents, clarifications, corrigenda and confirmations regarding unsecured loans. The Tribunal found both lower authorities erred in appreciating the record, set aside the CIT(A) order, directed the AO to delete the additions to income, and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>