https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385237 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition made on account of share capital and premium. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had complied with Rule 46A, the remand report was valid and properly considered, and the AO had no jurisdiction to appeal against his own findings. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had successfully proved the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the investor companies, and there was no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Sep 2019 07:41:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385237 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition made on account of share capital and premium. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had complied with Rule 46A, the remand report was valid and properly considered, and the AO had no jurisdiction to appeal against his own findings. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had successfully proved the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the investor companies, and there was no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385237