https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313556 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against additions under sections 68 and 56(2)(viib) relating to share capital and premium received. The court held that protective addition under section 56(2)(viib) was unjustified as the assessee valued shares per chartered accountant's certificate following Rule 11UA(a) of IT Rules 1962, which the AO failed to apply properly. For section 68 addition, the tribunal found the assessee had adequately proved investor identity, creditworthiness through sufficient capital reserves, and transaction genuineness via banking channels, rejecting the revenue's presumption-based approach. en-us Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Apr 2024 18:31:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313556 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against additions under sections 68 and 56(2)(viib) relating to share capital and premium received. The court held that protective addition under section 56(2)(viib) was unjustified as the assessee valued shares per chartered accountant's certificate following Rule 11UA(a) of IT Rules 1962, which the AO failed to apply properly. For section 68 addition, the tribunal found the assessee had adequately proved investor identity, creditworthiness through sufficient capital reserves, and transaction genuineness via banking channels, rejecting the revenue's presumption-based approach. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313556