https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457632 ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 68 for bogus share application money was unjustified. The assessee discharged its initial burden by providing complete documentation including investor details, bank records, and account payee cheques proving identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of share subscribers. The AO's reliance solely on investigation wing reports without finding deficiencies in submitted evidence was insufficient. Following Bombay HC precedent in Orchid Industries, non-appearance of subscribers before AO cannot justify addition when proper documentation exists. The tribunal emphasized that investments through bank accounts with proper book entries cannot be treated as accommodation entries merely based on subscribers' financial status. Appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:51:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457632 ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 68 for bogus share application money was unjustified. The assessee discharged its initial burden by providing complete documentation including investor details, bank records, and account payee cheques proving identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of share subscribers. The AO's reliance solely on investigation wing reports without finding deficiencies in submitted evidence was insufficient. Following Bombay HC precedent in Orchid Industries, non-appearance of subscribers before AO cannot justify addition when proper documentation exists. The tribunal emphasized that investments through bank accounts with proper book entries cannot be treated as accommodation entries merely based on subscribers' financial status. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457632