<?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>2020 (11) TMI 596 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400841</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 7,50,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee had sufficiently proven the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the share applicants through substantial documentary evidence. The appeal was partly allowed, and the legal issue of addition without incriminating material was deemed unnecessary to decide.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:18:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 596 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400841</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 7,50,00,000 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee had sufficiently proven the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the share applicants through substantial documentary evidence. The appeal was partly allowed, and the legal issue of addition without incriminating material was deemed unnecessary to decide.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>