<?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 (6) TMI 342 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792961</link>
    <description>Section 68 addition for alleged bogus share sale transactions and accommodation entries was held unsustainable because the assessee supported the sales with audited balance sheets, sale notes, share bills, bank statements, confirmations and PAN and income-tax details of the purchasers, while also showing corresponding reduction in investments. The department relied mainly on Investigation Wing material and general banking patterns, but did not undertake independent verification by issuing notices or summons to the purchasers, and the assessee was not given cross-examination of the persons whose material was used. The documentary evidence was sufficient to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, so the addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 11:36:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905798" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 342 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792961</link>
      <description>Section 68 addition for alleged bogus share sale transactions and accommodation entries was held unsustainable because the assessee supported the sales with audited balance sheets, sale notes, share bills, bank statements, confirmations and PAN and income-tax details of the purchasers, while also showing corresponding reduction in investments. The department relied mainly on Investigation Wing material and general banking patterns, but did not undertake independent verification by issuing notices or summons to the purchasers, and the assessee was not given cross-examination of the persons whose material was used. The documentary evidence was sufficient to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, so the addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>