https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210636 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, vacating the addition of Rs.16,50,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. The Tribunal held that the AO did not conduct further inquiries beyond issuing notices under Section 133(6) and that the statement of a director was irrelevant as the share capital was received later. Citing precedent, the Tribunal ruled that if share application money is received from alleged bogus shareholders, individual assessments should be reopened, not treated as undisclosed income. The appeal was allowed, and the addition was deleted. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210636 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, vacating the addition of Rs.16,50,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. The Tribunal held that the AO did not conduct further inquiries beyond issuing notices under Section 133(6) and that the statement of a director was irrelevant as the share capital was received later. Citing precedent, the Tribunal ruled that if share application money is received from alleged bogus shareholders, individual assessments should be reopened, not treated as undisclosed income. The appeal was allowed, and the addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210636