https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212501 ITAT upheld additions under s. 68, finding the assessee failed to discharge the onus to prove identity, capacity and genuineness of share application money from subscribing companies; addresses were non-existent, inspectors could not verify the companies, and the assessee did not produce correct addresses or creditors, so additions were sustained. The Tribunal set aside an ad hoc disallowance of telephone expenses, holding no reason was given and a juristic person's business telephone outlay cannot be treated as a personal disallowance. en-us Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2025 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212501 ITAT upheld additions under s. 68, finding the assessee failed to discharge the onus to prove identity, capacity and genuineness of share application money from subscribing companies; addresses were non-existent, inspectors could not verify the companies, and the assessee did not produce correct addresses or creditors, so additions were sustained. The Tribunal set aside an ad hoc disallowance of telephone expenses, holding no reason was given and a juristic person's business telephone outlay cannot be treated as a personal disallowance. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212501