https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782735 ITAT Kolkata-AT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the order of CIT(A). On the disallowance of "other expenses and interest expenses," the Tribunal agreed that, in the absence of supporting documentary evidence to establish that the expenses were wholly and exclusively for business purposes, a restriction of the disallowance to 50% was reasonable and required no interference. Regarding the addition under s. 68 towards alleged unsecured loans, ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the sums received from the concerned party were trade advances in the ordinary course of business, regularly adjusted against sale bills, and therefore could not be treated as unexplained cash credits. en-us Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Dec 2025 14:50:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782735 ITAT Kolkata-AT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the order of CIT(A). On the disallowance of "other expenses and interest expenses," the Tribunal agreed that, in the absence of supporting documentary evidence to establish that the expenses were wholly and exclusively for business purposes, a restriction of the disallowance to 50% was reasonable and required no interference. Regarding the addition under s. 68 towards alleged unsecured loans, ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the sums received from the concerned party were trade advances in the ordinary course of business, regularly adjusted against sale bills, and therefore could not be treated as unexplained cash credits. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782735