<?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 (10) TMI 226 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779430</link>
    <description>ITAT DELHI - AT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions under s.68 and related interest, finding the AO failed to produce contrary evidence to rebut documentary proof of identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of creditors. The tribunal agreed that low return of income or pre-deposit bank entries did not suffice to shift the burden back to the taxpayer. Revenue&#039;s grounds were rejected and the assessee was held to have discharged the onus under s.68.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2025 09:10:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=856402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 226 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779430</link>
      <description>ITAT DELHI - AT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions under s.68 and related interest, finding the AO failed to produce contrary evidence to rebut documentary proof of identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of creditors. The tribunal agreed that low return of income or pre-deposit bank entries did not suffice to shift the burden back to the taxpayer. Revenue&#039;s grounds were rejected and the assessee was held to have discharged the onus under s.68.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>