https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243009 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the share premium transactions were genuine, rejecting the Revenue's claims of low financial capacity and allegations of suitcase companies. The Tribunal also supported the allowance of business expenditure and criticized the AO's lack of proper investigation. As a result, the addition under Section 68 was deleted, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243009 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the share premium transactions were genuine, rejecting the Revenue's claims of low financial capacity and allegations of suitcase companies. The Tribunal also supported the allowance of business expenditure and criticized the AO's lack of proper investigation. As a result, the addition under Section 68 was deleted, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243009