<?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>Search assessment u/s 153A: Additions under ss 68 and 69C deleted, third-party retracted statements insufficient evidence</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94490</link>
    <description>ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upheld the order of the CIT(A) deleting additions made u/ss 68 and 69C in assessment framed u/s 153A. ITAT held that unsecured loans received by Assessee X from various companies could not be treated as bogus merely on the basis of third-party statements recorded u/s 131(1A), which were subsequently retracted, especially in absence of any incriminating material seized during search. The excel sheet found on an employee&#039;s laptop was held not to be incriminating, as all entries were duly recorded in Assessee X&#039;s books and fully corroborated by bank statements, financials, confirmations, PAN and tax records of lenders. ITAT further held that, once loans are accepted as genuine, the related addition of 1% commission u/s 69C for alleged accommodation entries also fails. All grounds raised by the Revenue were therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Search assessment u/s 153A: Additions under ss 68 and 69C deleted, third-party retracted statements insufficient evidence</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94490</link>
      <description>ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upheld the order of the CIT(A) deleting additions made u/ss 68 and 69C in assessment framed u/s 153A. ITAT held that unsecured loans received by Assessee X from various companies could not be treated as bogus merely on the basis of third-party statements recorded u/s 131(1A), which were subsequently retracted, especially in absence of any incriminating material seized during search. The excel sheet found on an employee&#039;s laptop was held not to be incriminating, as all entries were duly recorded in Assessee X&#039;s books and fully corroborated by bank statements, financials, confirmations, PAN and tax records of lenders. ITAT further held that, once loans are accepted as genuine, the related addition of 1% commission u/s 69C for alleged accommodation entries also fails. All grounds raised by the Revenue were therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>