Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
In a case concerning unexplained credit u/s 68, the assessee proved the identity and genuineness of share applicants, although their creditworthiness was questioned. The court held that if the assessing officer doubts creditworthiness, verification should be done in the shareholders' hands, not the assessee company's. If shareholders are identified, non-fictitious, and payments made through banking channels, no addition u/s 69 is permissible. The assessee provided ITRs, bank statements, and PAN details, proving shareholders' identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness. Regarding ad hoc expense disallowance for lack of bills/vouchers, the court observed the assessing officer failed to pinpoint specific expenses and deleted the disallowance. On share application money treated as unexplained u/s 68, the court held that for small investors investing limited amounts, creditworthiness cannot be doubted solely for non-filing of ITRs/bank statements when identity and genuineness are proved through application forms and receipts. Once shareholder identity is proved, the assessee's onus to prove the source is discharged.
In a case concerning unexplained credit u/s 68, the assessee proved the identity and genuineness of share applicants, although their creditworthiness was questioned. The court held that if the assessing officer doubts creditworthiness, verification should be done in the shareholders' hands, not the assessee company's. If shareholders are identified, non-fictitious, and payments made through banking channels, no addition u/s 69 is permissible. The assessee provided ITRs, bank statements, and PAN details, proving shareholders' identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness. Regarding ad hoc expense disallowance for lack of bills/vouchers, the court observed the assessing officer failed to pinpoint specific expenses and deleted the disallowance. On share application money treated as unexplained u/s 68, the court held that for small investors investing limited amounts, creditworthiness cannot be doubted solely for non-filing of ITRs/bank statements when identity and genuineness are proved through application forms and receipts. Once shareholder identity is proved, the assessee's onus to prove the source is discharged.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
