<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (12) TMI 394 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212822</link>
    <description>Share application money can escape addition under section 68 where the assessee produces primary evidence of the subscriber&#039;s identity, PAN, bank details, confirmations and banking trail; the Revenue must then conduct meaningful inquiry and cannot rely on suspicion, non-service of notices or unexplained cash deposits alone. Reassessment under sections 147 and 148 requires the Assessing Officer&#039;s independent application of mind; mechanical reliance on investigation-wing information or borrowed satisfaction does not establish a valid belief of escapement. Remand is appropriate only where verification or cross-examination remains genuinely necessary and not to cure the department&#039;s failure to investigate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 10:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 394 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212822</link>
      <description>Share application money can escape addition under section 68 where the assessee produces primary evidence of the subscriber&#039;s identity, PAN, bank details, confirmations and banking trail; the Revenue must then conduct meaningful inquiry and cannot rely on suspicion, non-service of notices or unexplained cash deposits alone. Reassessment under sections 147 and 148 requires the Assessing Officer&#039;s independent application of mind; mechanical reliance on investigation-wing information or borrowed satisfaction does not establish a valid belief of escapement. Remand is appropriate only where verification or cross-examination remains genuinely necessary and not to cure the department&#039;s failure to investigate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>