https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310915 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding denial of set-off of brought forward losses under section 79 due to changed shareholding pattern between two shareholders (FHL increased to 85%, FHHPL reduced to 15%), the tribunal held that since both shareholders as a group maintained 51% voting power in both years and FHHPL was FHL's holding company, no actual change in voting control occurred. Section 79 provisions were deemed inapplicable. Second, concerning addition under section 68 for unexplained share premium, the tribunal found that since the creditor's identity, creditworthiness, and transaction genuineness were established, the provision didn't apply merely because the assessee couldn't justify the premium rate. en-us Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Nov 2023 06:00:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310915 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding denial of set-off of brought forward losses under section 79 due to changed shareholding pattern between two shareholders (FHL increased to 85%, FHHPL reduced to 15%), the tribunal held that since both shareholders as a group maintained 51% voting power in both years and FHHPL was FHL's holding company, no actual change in voting control occurred. Section 79 provisions were deemed inapplicable. Second, concerning addition under section 68 for unexplained share premium, the tribunal found that since the creditor's identity, creditworthiness, and transaction genuineness were established, the provision didn't apply merely because the assessee couldn't justify the premium rate. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310915