<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (5) TMI 1518 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460739</link>
    <description>Share capital and premium additions under Section 68 were deleted because the Tribunal found complete evidence of the nature and source of the receipts, while the Assessing Officer identified no specific defect in the material filed and made no independent enquiry into genuineness. The challenge depended entirely on factual appreciation already undertaken by the Tribunal, so no substantial question of law arose. The High Court therefore upheld the deletion of the addition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:08:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=797620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1518 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460739</link>
      <description>Share capital and premium additions under Section 68 were deleted because the Tribunal found complete evidence of the nature and source of the receipts, while the Assessing Officer identified no specific defect in the material filed and made no independent enquiry into genuineness. The challenge depended entirely on factual appreciation already undertaken by the Tribunal, so no substantial question of law arose. The High Court therefore upheld the deletion of the addition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460739</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>