<?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 1872 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469837</link>
    <description>An addition for unexplained cash credit on share trading transactions was held unsustainable where the assessee furnished purchase and sale details, the transactions were recorded as actual trading, and the Assessing Officer relied mainly on an investigation report without independent inquiry; the deletion under section 68 was upheld. An addition for unexplained expenditure on credit card payments was also held unsustainable because the assessee produced the credit card statement and ledger account showing the source of payment, so the expenditure was treated as explained and the deletion under section 69 was upheld. The Revenue failed to show any error in the appellate order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2026 20:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1872 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469837</link>
      <description>An addition for unexplained cash credit on share trading transactions was held unsustainable where the assessee furnished purchase and sale details, the transactions were recorded as actual trading, and the Assessing Officer relied mainly on an investigation report without independent inquiry; the deletion under section 68 was upheld. An addition for unexplained expenditure on credit card payments was also held unsustainable because the assessee produced the credit card statement and ledger account showing the source of payment, so the expenditure was treated as explained and the deletion under section 69 was upheld. The Revenue failed to show any error in the appellate order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>