The assessee received share capital and share premium which was added by the AO under s. 68. In appeal, the CIT(A) called for two remand reports and, on examination of the material, held that the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant companies stood established. The AO himself recorded that the investments were made on personal contact and persuasion but failed to analyse the implication thereof. The CIT(A) observed that the AO had not doubted the identity and creditworthiness of the subscribers but had only questioned the high share premium. On facts, the CIT(A) noted that the assessee-company had shown substantial growth of about 39%, held impressive inventories of quoted equity shares (Rs. 8.38 crores as on 31-3-2011 and Rs. 9.36 crores as on 31-3-2012), and its audited results reflected profits growing more than three times between AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13, with corresponding increase in earnings per share. It was thus held that the assessee was a growing and profit-making company and the premium charged was justified. The Tribunal, after re-examining the entire material including a paper book of 1029 pages, affirmed the order of the CIT(A) and deleted the addition. On further appeal, the High Court held that the findings were purely factual and no substantial question of law arose; the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition under S 68.  (AY. 2012-13)