https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775617 The ITAT Kolkata upheld the addition under section 68 regarding bogus share capital and premium, rejecting the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition. The tribunal found no evidence of the creditors' identity, creditworthiness, or genuineness of the transactions. Despite the directors' non-appearance, notices under section 133(6) were responded to, indicating the share capital was arranged by the assessee. The tribunal relied on relevant precedent to confirm the charging of an excessive share premium without justification. Consequently, the CIT(A) order was set aside, and the AO's addition was restored, ruling in favor of the revenue. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:27:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775617 The ITAT Kolkata upheld the addition under section 68 regarding bogus share capital and premium, rejecting the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition. The tribunal found no evidence of the creditors' identity, creditworthiness, or genuineness of the transactions. Despite the directors' non-appearance, notices under section 133(6) were responded to, indicating the share capital was arranged by the assessee. The tribunal relied on relevant precedent to confirm the charging of an excessive share premium without justification. Consequently, the CIT(A) order was set aside, and the AO's addition was restored, ruling in favor of the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775617