<?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 (3) TMI 1704 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469225</link>
    <description>Unexplained cash credit addition could not be sustained for three unsecured loan creditors where the assessee had furnished confirmations, income-tax returns and bank statements, and the loans were routed through banking channels and later repaid. The tribunal noted that the same category of supporting evidence was produced for all fourteen creditors, and that the addition survived only because notices under section 133(6) were not served. As the documentary trail supported identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, mere non-service of notices was held insufficient to reject the explanation. The addition was directed to be deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 20:06:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1704 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469225</link>
      <description>Unexplained cash credit addition could not be sustained for three unsecured loan creditors where the assessee had furnished confirmations, income-tax returns and bank statements, and the loans were routed through banking channels and later repaid. The tribunal noted that the same category of supporting evidence was produced for all fourteen creditors, and that the addition survived only because notices under section 133(6) were not served. As the documentary trail supported identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, mere non-service of notices was held insufficient to reject the explanation. The addition was directed to be deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469225</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>