https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783138 The HC dismissed the assessee's appeal under s.260A challenging the ITAT's refusal to accept partners' confirmation letters as additional evidence for capital contribution. The Court held that the ITAT had duly considered the additional evidence and given cogent reasons for rejecting it, noting that the partnership deed did not specify partners' capital contribution and that the alleged capital contribution was deposited in the individual bank account of the assessee, not in the firm's account. The HC found no perversity or legal error in the Tribunal's appreciation of the evidence and concluded that no substantial question of law arose, thereby affirming the impugned order. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Dec 2025 08:41:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783138 The HC dismissed the assessee's appeal under s.260A challenging the ITAT's refusal to accept partners' confirmation letters as additional evidence for capital contribution. The Court held that the ITAT had duly considered the additional evidence and given cogent reasons for rejecting it, noting that the partnership deed did not specify partners' capital contribution and that the alleged capital contribution was deposited in the individual bank account of the assessee, not in the firm's account. The HC found no perversity or legal error in the Tribunal's appreciation of the evidence and concluded that no substantial question of law arose, thereby affirming the impugned order. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783138