https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466575 Challenge to the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of share subscribers was rejected because both the first appellate authority and the tribunal examined replies under section 133(6) and documentary evidence (income tax returns, audited accounts, bank statements, allotment advices) and reached concurrent factual conclusions. The High Court treated the dispute as factual and held that no substantial question of law arises from the revenue's attack on those concurrent findings, consequently dismissing the appeal and leaving the findings favorable to the assessee intact. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Feb 2026 19:01:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466575 Challenge to the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of share subscribers was rejected because both the first appellate authority and the tribunal examined replies under section 133(6) and documentary evidence (income tax returns, audited accounts, bank statements, allotment advices) and reached concurrent factual conclusions. The High Court treated the dispute as factual and held that no substantial question of law arises from the revenue's attack on those concurrent findings, consequently dismissing the appeal and leaving the findings favorable to the assessee intact. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466575