<?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 (11) TMI 39 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780571</link>
    <description>ITAT Kolkata held that where an assessee produced documentary evidence of unsecured loans and bank statements showing repayment, the AO cannot make an addition under s.68 solely on suspicion of accommodation entries or shell-company routing. Because the loans and their repayment were established on the record, the tribunal disallowed the addition and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, aligning with precedents from Calcutta HC on similar facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2025 08:17:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=861573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 39 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780571</link>
      <description>ITAT Kolkata held that where an assessee produced documentary evidence of unsecured loans and bank statements showing repayment, the AO cannot make an addition under s.68 solely on suspicion of accommodation entries or shell-company routing. Because the loans and their repayment were established on the record, the tribunal disallowed the addition and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, aligning with precedents from Calcutta HC on similar facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780571</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>