<?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>2026 (6) TMI 1400 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794019</link>
    <description>Unsecured loans received and repaid through banking channels, supported by bank statements and the lender&#039;s income-tax returns, were held to satisfy the Tribunal that the section 68 addition was not justified. Relying on jurisdictional precedents, the HC found no substantial question of law arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order. The deletion of the addition was therefore upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 08:33:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1400 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794019</link>
      <description>Unsecured loans received and repaid through banking channels, supported by bank statements and the lender&#039;s income-tax returns, were held to satisfy the Tribunal that the section 68 addition was not justified. Relying on jurisdictional precedents, the HC found no substantial question of law arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order. The deletion of the addition was therefore upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794019</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>