1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal decision on unexplained cash credit & salary disallowance under section 68</h1> The appeal involved the addition of share application money as unexplained cash credit under section 68 and the disallowance of salary paid to Directors' ... - Issues Involved: Appeal against addition of share application money as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 and disallowance of salary paid to relatives of Directors.Addition of Share Application Money:The assessee, engaged in manufacturing, received share application money from 15 persons totaling to Rs. 20,48,500, not assessed to tax. Assessee provided confirmations and proofs of creditworthiness, but AO treated the sum as income u/s 68. CIT(A) confirmed, stating failure to discharge onus. Assessee argued share applicants admitted payments, citing court decisions. Tribunal noted courts' view that if share applicants admit payments, no further inquiry is needed into creditworthiness. Relying on precedents, Tribunal allowed the ground, holding section 68 requirements satisfied.Disallowance of Salary to Directors' Relatives:Assessee paid Rs. 3,00,000 as salary to Directors' relatives, justifying their roles but providing no evidence. AO and CIT(A) disallowed the amount due to lack of proof of services rendered. Tribunal upheld the disallowance, stating without evidence of services, the claim for business expenses cannot be accepted.In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed, with the addition of share application money under section 68 being deleted, but the disallowance of salary to Directors' relatives being upheld.