Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2021 (6) TMI 965 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal grants LTCG exemption, emphasizes natural justice principles The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees, granting them the benefit of exemption under Section 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) and ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal grants LTCG exemption, emphasizes natural justice principles

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees, granting them the benefit of exemption under Section 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) and setting aside the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal held that the reliance on third-party statements without providing an opportunity for cross-examination was unjustified, emphasizing the importance of documentary evidence and principles of natural justice. The decisions were in favor of the assessees, Shri Hakimuddin Khambati and Smt. Manisha Agrawal, with the Tribunal's ruling pronounced on 25.05.2021.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Denial of exemption under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act for Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG).
                          2. Validity of assessment proceedings due to lack of opportunity for cross-examination of third-party statements used for additions.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Denial of Exemption under Section 10(38) for LTCG:
                          The main issue was whether the CIT(A) erred in denying the exemption under Section 10(38) for LTCG earned by the assessee and treating the transactions as sham. The assessee had claimed LTCG on the sale of shares which were purchased offline and later sold online through a recognized stock exchange. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) treated these gains as bogus, citing reasons such as abnormal increase in share prices not backed by financial growth and outcomes of investigations involving entry operators and share brokers.

                          The Tribunal observed that the assessee provided ample documents to prove the genuineness of the transactions, including contract notes, demat statements, and bank statements. These documents were not found to be incorrect by the A.O. or CIT(A). The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Swati Luthra, where similar issues were adjudicated in favor of the assessee, allowing the claim of exemption under Section 10(38).

                          The Tribunal emphasized that the transactions were supported by documentary evidence, and the A.O. did not provide any specific defect in these documents. The Tribunal also noted that the A.O.'s reliance on third-party statements without providing an opportunity for cross-examination was a serious flaw, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries.

                          2. Validity of Assessment Proceedings:
                          The second issue was whether the assessment proceedings were valid given that the assessee was not granted the opportunity to cross-examine the persons whose statements were used by the A.O. to make the additions. The Tribunal found that the A.O. had based his conclusions on statements from third parties without confronting these statements to the assessee or providing an opportunity for cross-examination. This was a violation of the principles of natural justice.

                          The Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries, which held that not allowing cross-examination of witnesses whose statements are used as the basis for an order is a serious flaw that makes the order nullity. The Tribunal also noted that similar findings were made by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi, where the court dismissed the revenue's appeal due to lack of evidence showing any agreement between the assessee and the parties providing accommodation entries.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove the genuineness of the transactions and had fulfilled the conditions of Section 10(38) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the A.O.'s reliance on third-party statements without providing an opportunity for cross-examination was not justified. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of both assessees, granting them the benefit of exemption under Section 10(38) for LTCG and setting aside the additions made by the A.O.

                          The appeals of Shri Hakimuddin Khambati and Smt. Manisha Agrawal were allowed, and the Tribunal's decision was pronounced as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 25.05.2021.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found