In the instant case, revenue is in appeal against the order of CIT that CIT has erred in deleting addition of 5,85,00,000/- made u/s. 68 of the IT Act on account of unexplained share capital and premium And CIT also erred in holding that on the prevailing facts of the case the onus on the part of the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act stands discharged. Held that—We have gone through the paper book filed by the assessee and found that in most of the cases, the investor companies had sufficient share holder’s funds, so as to cover the investments made with the assessee company and the AO has failed to enquire into such facts before doubting the creditworthiness of the share holders. The satisfaction of the Assessing Officer as to the credibility of explanation of assessee is the basis of invocation of provisions of section 68. However, such satisfaction must not be illusory or imaginary but must have been derived from relevant facts and evidences and on the basis of proper enquiry and material before him. In view of aforesaid facts and plethora of evidences submitted by the assessee, on which no reasonable doubts have been created by the AO, the onus that lay on the assessee under section 68, stands completely discharged on the part of the assessee. - Decided against revenue.