<?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 (5) TMI 2247 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467302</link>
    <description>A cash receipt claimed as a gift was held unsupported because the assessee gave shifting explanations, and the donor&#039;s source, identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction were not satisfactorily proved. The amount was therefore treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the relief granted below was unsustainable. The separate deletion of the addition for negative cash balance also failed because it depended on the same unproved timing and availability of cash; once that premise collapsed, the cash deficit remained unexplained. The Revenue&#039;s appeal succeeded on both substantive additions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:36:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2247 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467302</link>
      <description>A cash receipt claimed as a gift was held unsupported because the assessee gave shifting explanations, and the donor&#039;s source, identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction were not satisfactorily proved. The amount was therefore treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the relief granted below was unsustainable. The separate deletion of the addition for negative cash balance also failed because it depended on the same unproved timing and availability of cash; once that premise collapsed, the cash deficit remained unexplained. The Revenue&#039;s appeal succeeded on both substantive additions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467302</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>