https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785720 Addition alleging unexplained share premium and share capital was rejected because the assessee proved identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of investors, shifting the burden to revenue and no contrary material was produced, so protective addition was deleted. Valuation by the assessee's prescribed expert was held acceptable and rejected by revenue in error, resulting in deletion of related addition. Enhancement of income by appellate authority without issuing the required notice was held impermissible and reversed. Business expenditure incurred after establishment was allowed despite reduced activity, and an incorrect addition based on a mismatched interest figure vis-à-vis Form 26AS was deleted. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jan 2026 09:22:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785720 Addition alleging unexplained share premium and share capital was rejected because the assessee proved identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of investors, shifting the burden to revenue and no contrary material was produced, so protective addition was deleted. Valuation by the assessee's prescribed expert was held acceptable and rejected by revenue in error, resulting in deletion of related addition. Enhancement of income by appellate authority without issuing the required notice was held impermissible and reversed. Business expenditure incurred after establishment was allowed despite reduced activity, and an incorrect addition based on a mismatched interest figure vis-à-vis Form 26AS was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785720