https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464459 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal under section 260A, affirming the ITAT/CIT(A) findings: the addition under section 68 was deleted because the assessee discharged the onus by establishing lenders' creditworthiness and repayment, and the court would not reappreciate facts; the section 14A disallowance was rightly deleted as it should be computed only in respect of investments that actually yielded exempt income. No substantial question of law was found. en-us Mon, 26 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 20:27:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464459 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal under section 260A, affirming the ITAT/CIT(A) findings: the addition under section 68 was deleted because the assessee discharged the onus by establishing lenders' creditworthiness and repayment, and the court would not reappreciate facts; the section 14A disallowance was rightly deleted as it should be computed only in respect of investments that actually yielded exempt income. No substantial question of law was found. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464459