https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778561 ITAT allowed the appeal. It held the s.68 addition for alleged bogus share application money unsustainable because the remand report and bank statements showed the receipt occurred prior to the relevant FY 2011-12, so s.68 for AY 2012-13 did not arise; the CIT(A)'s confirmation of the addition was deleted. The s.14A disallowance was set aside and remitted to the AO to verify whether any exempt income was earned in FY 2011-12 and to decide the matter afresh after hearing the assessee. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 08:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778561 ITAT allowed the appeal. It held the s.68 addition for alleged bogus share application money unsustainable because the remand report and bank statements showed the receipt occurred prior to the relevant FY 2011-12, so s.68 for AY 2012-13 did not arise; the CIT(A)'s confirmation of the addition was deleted. The s.14A disallowance was set aside and remitted to the AO to verify whether any exempt income was earned in FY 2011-12 and to decide the matter afresh after hearing the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778561