<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (4) TMI 1376 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790307</link>
    <description>Share application money and share premium are taxable under section 68 where the assessee fails to prove the investors&#039; identity, creditworthiness and genuineness on the basis of surrounding circumstances, bank trail and human probability; mere filing of confirmations, returns and bank statements may be insufficient where accommodation-entry indicators and non-production of directors exist. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not automatic from a sustained quantum addition, because a fact-based inference on disputed evidence does not by itself establish concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The ruling highlights that section 68 demands a substantive evidentiary discharge, while penalty requires an independent showing of culpable conduct.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 17:59:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898006" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1376 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790307</link>
      <description>Share application money and share premium are taxable under section 68 where the assessee fails to prove the investors&#039; identity, creditworthiness and genuineness on the basis of surrounding circumstances, bank trail and human probability; mere filing of confirmations, returns and bank statements may be insufficient where accommodation-entry indicators and non-production of directors exist. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not automatic from a sustained quantum addition, because a fact-based inference on disputed evidence does not by itself establish concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The ruling highlights that section 68 demands a substantive evidentiary discharge, while penalty requires an independent showing of culpable conduct.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>