https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782276 ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of addition u/s 68 in respect of loans received from an NBFC. The Tribunal held that mere non-response to notice u/s 133(6) cannot justify addition when the assessee has discharged its onus u/s 68 by furnishing loan agreements, confirmations, bank statements, and proof of repayment. It distinguished the HC ruling in N.R. Portfolio, noting that here the creditor is an NBFC engaged in lending and the transactions were duly substantiated. Consequential disallowance of interest on unsecured loans and addition of 2% commission alleged to be paid for accommodation entries were also deleted, with no interference warranted. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782276 ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of addition u/s 68 in respect of loans received from an NBFC. The Tribunal held that mere non-response to notice u/s 133(6) cannot justify addition when the assessee has discharged its onus u/s 68 by furnishing loan agreements, confirmations, bank statements, and proof of repayment. It distinguished the HC ruling in N.R. Portfolio, noting that here the creditor is an NBFC engaged in lending and the transactions were duly substantiated. Consequential disallowance of interest on unsecured loans and addition of 2% commission alleged to be paid for accommodation entries were also deleted, with no interference warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782276