<?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 (2) TMI 1465 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466568</link>
    <description>Addition of unexplained bank credits was sustained because the assessee failed to prove identity, source or genuineness of receipts; consequently the Assessing Officer&#039;s treatment of excess bank credits as unexplained income under the relevant provision was upheld and claimed expenses tied to those receipts were disallowed as unexplained. The appellate authority relied on precedent that where the assessee does not discharge the onus to establish creditworthiness of creditors or source of receipts, additions are permissible. No jurisdictional or procedural infirmity was found, and a remand was refused; the tax addition and expense disallowance were confirmed in favour of the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 19:01:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886110" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 1465 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466568</link>
      <description>Addition of unexplained bank credits was sustained because the assessee failed to prove identity, source or genuineness of receipts; consequently the Assessing Officer&#039;s treatment of excess bank credits as unexplained income under the relevant provision was upheld and claimed expenses tied to those receipts were disallowed as unexplained. The appellate authority relied on precedent that where the assessee does not discharge the onus to establish creditworthiness of creditors or source of receipts, additions are permissible. No jurisdictional or procedural infirmity was found, and a remand was refused; the tax addition and expense disallowance were confirmed in favour of the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466568</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>