<?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>2025 (3) TMI 1964 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470056</link>
    <description>Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 requires an assessee receiving share capital and share premium to establish the identity of investors, their creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the transactions. The analysis records that these requirements may be supported through investor names, addresses, PAN details, income-tax returns, bank statements, confirmations, balance-sheet disclosures, and receipt through banking channels. Direct responses by investor companies to notices under Section 133(6) further support verification. The notes also state that directors&#039; non-appearance in person, particularly where they sought to appear before an officer at Kolkata, should not alone discredit the transactions or justify an adverse inference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 19:02:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1964 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470056</link>
      <description>Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 requires an assessee receiving share capital and share premium to establish the identity of investors, their creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the transactions. The analysis records that these requirements may be supported through investor names, addresses, PAN details, income-tax returns, bank statements, confirmations, balance-sheet disclosures, and receipt through banking channels. Direct responses by investor companies to notices under Section 133(6) further support verification. The notes also state that directors&#039; non-appearance in person, particularly where they sought to appear before an officer at Kolkata, should not alone discredit the transactions or justify an adverse inference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>