https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274076 The dominant issue was whether share application/share capital receipts could be added as unexplained cash credits under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the assessee discharged its initial onus by filing sufficient documentary evidence establishing the investors' identity, creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the transactions, and by allotting shares to the investors; the AO failed to conduct proper enquiry and did not rebut the favourable results of notices issued under s. 133(6), rendering the addition unsustainable. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities were set aside and the s. 68 addition of Rs. 2.44 crores was deleted, with interest under ss. 234B and 234D treated as consequential. en-us Fri, 02 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 12:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274076 The dominant issue was whether share application/share capital receipts could be added as unexplained cash credits under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the assessee discharged its initial onus by filing sufficient documentary evidence establishing the investors' identity, creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the transactions, and by allotting shares to the investors; the AO failed to conduct proper enquiry and did not rebut the favourable results of notices issued under s. 133(6), rendering the addition unsustainable. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities were set aside and the s. 68 addition of Rs. 2.44 crores was deleted, with interest under ss. 234B and 234D treated as consequential. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274076