https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447539 The ITAT Mumbai upheld CIT(A)'s decision deleting additions made by AO under two issues. First, regarding share premium treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, CIT(A) correctly admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A and found assessee had established identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of transactions with holding company. AO failed to disprove genuineness of documents. Second, concerning disallowance of 20% advertisement expenses and 25% travelling expenses, CIT(A) properly deleted additions as AO made estimated disallowances without considering details furnished by assessee or cogent basis for rejection. Revenue's appeals dismissed. en-us Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Dec 2023 08:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447539 The ITAT Mumbai upheld CIT(A)'s decision deleting additions made by AO under two issues. First, regarding share premium treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, CIT(A) correctly admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A and found assessee had established identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of transactions with holding company. AO failed to disprove genuineness of documents. Second, concerning disallowance of 20% advertisement expenses and 25% travelling expenses, CIT(A) properly deleted additions as AO made estimated disallowances without considering details furnished by assessee or cogent basis for rejection. Revenue's appeals dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447539