https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252293 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found the assessee had adequately proven the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of share applicants through PAN numbers, ROC details, and banking channels. It criticized the A.O. for heavily relying on an unreliable Inspector's report without verifying addresses from the ROC and not timely providing the report to the assessee. The Tribunal concluded the CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition, as the assessee met its burden of proof. The appeal was dismissed on 28.8.2014. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252293 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found the assessee had adequately proven the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of share applicants through PAN numbers, ROC details, and banking channels. It criticized the A.O. for heavily relying on an unreliable Inspector's report without verifying addresses from the ROC and not timely providing the report to the assessee. The Tribunal concluded the CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition, as the assessee met its burden of proof. The appeal was dismissed on 28.8.2014. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252293