https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436092 Calcutta HC held that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) reasonably inferred that unexplained credits were not genuine and, absent satisfactory explanation on genuineness, creditworthiness and identity, additions under s.68 were justified. The court found the AO/CIT(A) had examined proximate facts, surrounding circumstances, timing of buy-sell operations and abnormal share-price movements; their inferential process was one a prudent person could follow. Revision under s.263 was not warranted to disturb those findings, and the decision was affirmed in favour of the revenue. en-us Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2025 14:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436092 Calcutta HC held that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) reasonably inferred that unexplained credits were not genuine and, absent satisfactory explanation on genuineness, creditworthiness and identity, additions under s.68 were justified. The court found the AO/CIT(A) had examined proximate facts, surrounding circumstances, timing of buy-sell operations and abnormal share-price movements; their inferential process was one a prudent person could follow. Revision under s.263 was not warranted to disturb those findings, and the decision was affirmed in favour of the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436092