DCIT., CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD vs. RATHNAMMA INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1235/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 November 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)8 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had satisfactorily explained the loans by providing confirmation letters, financial statements, bank statements, and proving the source of the source of the loans. Therefore, the AO erred in making additions under Section 68.

What were the facts?

The assessee company received unsecured loans from various parties. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to the total income under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits, stating the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the lenders. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee proved the genuineness and creditworthiness of unsecured loan creditors and the source of funds for the loans.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Rathnamma Infratech Private Limited, Flat No.501, Megnas Lake View Apartments, S.Y. No.56 and 57, Near Meenakshi Towers, Khanmett, Hyderabad – 500084, Telangana. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →