<?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>2018 (7) TMI 2373 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463857</link>
    <description>ITAT, Bangalore (AT) upheld multiple disallowances: vehicle maintenance, repairs and maintenance (Rs.1 lakh) and interest claimed on loans shown to be taken by the assessee&#039;s mother were disallowed for lack of supporting documentary evidence and not being shown as incurred wholly and exclusively for business. Additions under section 68 for outstanding unsecured loans were confirmed due to absence of rebuttal evidence. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s deletions of unexplained cash credits and remitted those issues to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing that the AO be afforded an opportunity to examine and comment on the additional evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:13:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=851744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2373 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463857</link>
      <description>ITAT, Bangalore (AT) upheld multiple disallowances: vehicle maintenance, repairs and maintenance (Rs.1 lakh) and interest claimed on loans shown to be taken by the assessee&#039;s mother were disallowed for lack of supporting documentary evidence and not being shown as incurred wholly and exclusively for business. Additions under section 68 for outstanding unsecured loans were confirmed due to absence of rebuttal evidence. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s deletions of unexplained cash credits and remitted those issues to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing that the AO be afforded an opportunity to examine and comment on the additional evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>