<?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>2021 (3) TMI 322 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404994</link>
    <description>An addition under section 68 for share capital and share premium was held unsustainable where the assessee produced PAN details, income-tax returns, audited financial statements, share application forms, bank statements, confirmations and source-of-funds evidence for the corporate shareholders. The assessee was treated as having discharged the initial burden by showing the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants through primary documentary evidence and banking records. The burden then shifted to the Assessing Officer to conduct further enquiry and disprove those materials; mere non-appearance of directors or non-compliance with summons, without more, was not enough. The note also states that suspicion or conjecture could not replace proof, and the addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:49:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=638393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 322 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404994</link>
      <description>An addition under section 68 for share capital and share premium was held unsustainable where the assessee produced PAN details, income-tax returns, audited financial statements, share application forms, bank statements, confirmations and source-of-funds evidence for the corporate shareholders. The assessee was treated as having discharged the initial burden by showing the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants through primary documentary evidence and banking records. The burden then shifted to the Assessing Officer to conduct further enquiry and disprove those materials; mere non-appearance of directors or non-compliance with summons, without more, was not enough. The note also states that suspicion or conjecture could not replace proof, and the addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>