<?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>2022 (9) TMI 763 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427818</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the lower authorities in a tax case involving disallowance of transactions procuring share capital. The appellant&#039;s challenges regarding the credibility of shareholding companies, failure to establish identity and creditworthiness of investor companies, discrepancies in share valuation, and consideration of expenditures were dismissed. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellant&#039;s arguments, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and upholding the addition of unexplained money under section 68 of the Act. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the lack of credible evidence from the appellant resulted in the unfavorable outcome.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2022 07:58:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 763 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427818</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the lower authorities in a tax case involving disallowance of transactions procuring share capital. The appellant&#039;s challenges regarding the credibility of shareholding companies, failure to establish identity and creditworthiness of investor companies, discrepancies in share valuation, and consideration of expenditures were dismissed. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellant&#039;s arguments, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and upholding the addition of unexplained money under section 68 of the Act. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the lack of credible evidence from the appellant resulted in the unfavorable outcome.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427818</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>