Appellate decision rejects income addition where partner's capital shown as loan/credit; revenue failed to meet burden of proof

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of an income addition where the AO had disallowed capital introduced by a partner as unexplained income. The Tribunal found the assessee established identity and capacity of the creditor (the partner) and that absence of interest payments to a company did not demonstrate transaction sham; alternative explanations (e.g. borrower's poor finances) could account for nonpayment. The AO failed to discharge the burden of proving the funds originated from the firm rather than the partner or that the transaction was a colourable device. In consequence the addition lacked sufficient evidentiary foundation and the Revenue's ground was rejected.....