<?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 (4) TMI 1531 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307964</link>
    <description>The Revenue&#039;s appeal against the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer in relation to unexplained income of the assessee company under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was dismissed. The CIT(A) found that the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share subscribers were established through evidence provided by the assessee, leading to the conclusion that the addition of Rs.7,60,00,000 as unexplained cash credit was unjustified. The CIT(A) emphasized that once additions were made in the hands of share subscribers, no further additions in the hands of the assessee company were warranted to avoid double taxation of the same amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 03 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 May 2023 22:07:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=714065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1531 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307964</link>
      <description>The Revenue&#039;s appeal against the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer in relation to unexplained income of the assessee company under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was dismissed. The CIT(A) found that the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share subscribers were established through evidence provided by the assessee, leading to the conclusion that the addition of Rs.7,60,00,000 as unexplained cash credit was unjustified. The CIT(A) emphasized that once additions were made in the hands of share subscribers, no further additions in the hands of the assessee company were warranted to avoid double taxation of the same amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>