<?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>2025 (11) TMI 1944 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466278</link>
    <description>Addition for alleged accommodation entries was rejected where the assessing officer neither disallowed the books of account nor established any cash trail; the taxpayer had recorded and offered the sales as revenue and received payments through banking channels. The assessee produced sales tax/excise certificates, VAT returns, invoices, bank statements, delivery evidence, C-Forms and tax audit records, thereby discharging the evidentiary onus and negating the accommodation-entry allegation. Reliance solely on investigation inputs without independent verification was insufficient. Re-adding accepted sales would amount to impermissible double addition; the impugned addition was deleted and decision upheld against revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:28:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=882695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1944 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466278</link>
      <description>Addition for alleged accommodation entries was rejected where the assessing officer neither disallowed the books of account nor established any cash trail; the taxpayer had recorded and offered the sales as revenue and received payments through banking channels. The assessee produced sales tax/excise certificates, VAT returns, invoices, bank statements, delivery evidence, C-Forms and tax audit records, thereby discharging the evidentiary onus and negating the accommodation-entry allegation. Reliance solely on investigation inputs without independent verification was insufficient. Re-adding accepted sales would amount to impermissible double addition; the impugned addition was deleted and decision upheld against revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466278</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>