https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779350 ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted additions made under s.68 and s.69. The Tribunal held the assessee proved identity, genuineness and source of the loan and purchases by producing confirmations, ledgers, return acknowledgements, bank statements, Form 26AS/TCS entries and payment evidence, so the transactions could not be treated as unexplained. Reliance was placed on precedents from HC and ITAT authorities that documentary proof and bank records preclude additions based merely on low declared income of lenders or related-party routing. Appeal allowed; additions deleted. en-us Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Oct 2025 08:22:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779350 ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted additions made under s.68 and s.69. The Tribunal held the assessee proved identity, genuineness and source of the loan and purchases by producing confirmations, ledgers, return acknowledgements, bank statements, Form 26AS/TCS entries and payment evidence, so the transactions could not be treated as unexplained. Reliance was placed on precedents from HC and ITAT authorities that documentary proof and bank records preclude additions based merely on low declared income of lenders or related-party routing. Appeal allowed; additions deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779350