https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778080 ITAT MUMBAI held that mere violation of RBI notifications cannot alone render share capital unexplained under section 68 where the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions and the revenue did not dispute these facts; the CIT(A)'s addition sustained solely for alleged RBI violation was set aside. The tribunal remitted the claim for other expenses to the AO for factual verification and directed the assessee to furnish evidence. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778080 ITAT MUMBAI held that mere violation of RBI notifications cannot alone render share capital unexplained under section 68 where the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions and the revenue did not dispute these facts; the CIT(A)'s addition sustained solely for alleged RBI violation was set aside. The tribunal remitted the claim for other expenses to the AO for factual verification and directed the assessee to furnish evidence. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778080