https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756196 ITAT Mumbai dismissed revenue's appeal regarding unexplained cash credit u/s 68. CIT(A) correctly deleted addition after assessee established identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of investors who provided share premium through preferential shares under rule 46A. Regarding section 14A disallowance, CIT(A) properly deleted addition following HDFC Bank precedent, finding assessee's own funds (Rs. 166.45 crores) exceeded exempt income investments (Rs. 48.70 crores), creating presumption that investments were from interest-free funds. ITAT directed copy to CBDT requesting guidance on staking tax claims under IBC liquidation proceedings, referencing SC decisions in Sundaresh Bhatt and Rajendra Prasad Tak regarding waterfall mechanism under section 53 IBC. en-us Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jul 2024 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756196 ITAT Mumbai dismissed revenue's appeal regarding unexplained cash credit u/s 68. CIT(A) correctly deleted addition after assessee established identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of investors who provided share premium through preferential shares under rule 46A. Regarding section 14A disallowance, CIT(A) properly deleted addition following HDFC Bank precedent, finding assessee's own funds (Rs. 166.45 crores) exceeded exempt income investments (Rs. 48.70 crores), creating presumption that investments were from interest-free funds. ITAT directed copy to CBDT requesting guidance on staking tax claims under IBC liquidation proceedings, referencing SC decisions in Sundaresh Bhatt and Rajendra Prasad Tak regarding waterfall mechanism under section 53 IBC. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756196