https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783040 The ITAT Delhi allowed the Revenue's appeal against deletion of additions under section 68. The assessee failed to discharge the onus of proving identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of investors' transactions; key agreements and complete bank statements were not produced. CIT(A) had deleted certain additions solely on the basis that the amounts were subsequently returned through banking channels, despite recording that crucial supporting documents (including agreements with certain investors) were not furnished. ITAT held that mere routing of funds through banks and subsequent refunds do not establish genuineness under section 68, set aside the deletions, and restored the additions made by the AO. en-us Wed, 13 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Dec 2025 12:22:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783040 The ITAT Delhi allowed the Revenue's appeal against deletion of additions under section 68. The assessee failed to discharge the onus of proving identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of investors' transactions; key agreements and complete bank statements were not produced. CIT(A) had deleted certain additions solely on the basis that the amounts were subsequently returned through banking channels, despite recording that crucial supporting documents (including agreements with certain investors) were not furnished. ITAT held that mere routing of funds through banks and subsequent refunds do not establish genuineness under section 68, set aside the deletions, and restored the additions made by the AO. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783040