<?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>2023 (2) TMI 847 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434332</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 25,04,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in a case concerning share capital and share premium. The Tribunal found the transactions lacked genuineness and creditworthiness, with the share applicants having no substantial business activity and engaging in circular routing of funds. Despite the assessee&#039;s submissions, including documents like bank statements and IT returns, the Tribunal concluded that the high share premium lacked justification. The appeal was dismissed as the assessee failed to establish the legitimacy of the transactions, in line with judicial precedents emphasizing the need to prove identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2023 08:51:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705365" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 847 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434332</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 25,04,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in a case concerning share capital and share premium. The Tribunal found the transactions lacked genuineness and creditworthiness, with the share applicants having no substantial business activity and engaging in circular routing of funds. Despite the assessee&#039;s submissions, including documents like bank statements and IT returns, the Tribunal concluded that the high share premium lacked justification. The appeal was dismissed as the assessee failed to establish the legitimacy of the transactions, in line with judicial precedents emphasizing the need to prove identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434332</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>