https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300521 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 4,79,00,000 as unexplained share application money, citing the assessee's provision of adequate documentation to establish the legitimacy of the transactions. The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's claim of Rule 46A violation, noting that the CIT(A) had the discretion to admit additional evidence if deemed necessary for a just decision. The importance of thorough verification and the Revenue's burden to provide substantial evidence in disputing transaction genuineness were highlighted in the Tribunal's ruling. en-us Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Feb 2022 11:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300521 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 4,79,00,000 as unexplained share application money, citing the assessee's provision of adequate documentation to establish the legitimacy of the transactions. The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's claim of Rule 46A violation, noting that the CIT(A) had the discretion to admit additional evidence if deemed necessary for a just decision. The importance of thorough verification and the Revenue's burden to provide substantial evidence in disputing transaction genuineness were highlighted in the Tribunal's ruling. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300521