The ITAT Surat ruled on unexplained cash credit u/s 68, finding ...

Tribunal Supports Assessee on Unexplained Cash Credit, Cites Identity and Repayment Proof as Key Factors.

June 5, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

The ITAT Surat ruled on unexplained cash credit u/s 68, finding the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of unsecured loan receipts. Repayment evidence via banking channels was accepted. Legal precedents like CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji were cited to support no addition when loans were repaid in subsequent years. Cases like ACIT Vs Naresh Nemchand Shah and Rajhans Construction (P) Ltd. were referenced for similar views. The decision in CIT Vs. Amber Tradecorp (P) ltd. emphasized no addition u/s 68 if loans were repaid. Precedents like Rohini Builders and USHA STUD AGRICULTURAL FARM LTD. were cited to support the assessee's position. The addition of unsecured loans was disallowed, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The ITAT Surat ruled on unexplained cash credit u/s 68, finding ...

Tribunal Supports Assessee on Unexplained Cash Credit, Cites Identity and Repayment Proof as Key Factors.

June 5, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Addition u/s 68 - Unexplained cash credit - It is well settled principle that the repayment of cash credit would not prove the genuineness of cash credit. It is the...

Unexplained cash credits u/s 68 and the applicability of Section 115BBE for taxing such additions. The key points are: The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notices u/s...

Unsecured loans treated as unexplained cash credits u/s 68. Interest paid on such unexplained loans also added to income. Assessee's contention of repayment of loans...

Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - onus to prove source of cash - The Tribunal found that the assessee's business model of currency exchange was genuine, supported by...

The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act for share application money received from various individuals. The company failed to prove the...

The ITAT Bangalore addressed unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A, focusing on the credibility of earlier withdrawals as a source for redeposits. The Tribunal examined fund...

The assessee's unexplained cash credits u/s 68 were deleted by the CIT(A) after accepting the submissions that the cash receipts from various sources like cash sales,...

The Appellate Tribunal considered unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The Tribunal noted the assessee's agricultural income and expenses but found...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) adjudicated on various additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained/bogus credits or trading liabilities. The...

Deposits by the assessee in bank account during demonetization period were not unexplained. Section 69A is inapplicable as there were proper entries for cash sales, cash...

Unexplained cash credit - unsecured loan u/s 68 - The assessee has limited means to call for elaborate information required by AO. Looking to the list of documents filed...

Cash deposit during demonetization period treated as unexplained cash credit. Assessee's claim of introducing cash as capital in proprietary concern not accepted due to...

Addition made u/s. 69A - unexplained cash deposits - The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the cash on hand at the beginning of the financial year...

Unexplained cash credits u/s 68 - There is no justification in treating the loans raised by the assessee from the said companies as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 -...

Assessee purchased credit cards using unexplained cash payments. AO made addition u/s 69A as assessee failed to explain source of cash. CIT(A) confirmed addition since...

Quick Updates: