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 :

        2023 (12) TMI 21 - 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

        Addition under Section 68 for bogus LTCG deleted where AO relied only on Investigation Wing report without independent inquiry ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 for bogus LTCG cannot be sustained where AO relied solely on Investigation Wing report and price-volume ...
                        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.

                            Addition under Section 68 for bogus LTCG deleted where AO relied only on Investigation Wing report without independent inquiry

                            ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 for bogus LTCG cannot be sustained where AO relied solely on Investigation Wing report and price-volume analysis without conducting independent inquiry. The tribunal found AO's conclusions based on conjecture without direct or circumstantial evidence. Assessee had offered short-term capital gains to tax in subsequent year, held unsold shares, and provided proper documentation. AO failed to identify specific defects in assessee's explanation or evidence of unaccounted income. Addition deleted in assessee's favor.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Validity of the order passed in the name of a deceased person.
                            2. Validity of the reopening of the assessment under Section 148.
                            3. Legitimacy of the addition under Section 68 for the sale of shares and the alleged bogus nature of the transaction.

                            Summary:

                            Issue 1: Validity of the order passed in the name of a deceased person
                            The appellant argued that the CIT(A)-NFAC erred in passing the order under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the name of a deceased person, making the order void and against the provisions of law. The appellant had informed the authorities about the reassessment proceedings being conducted on the legal representative.

                            Issue 2: Validity of the reopening of the assessment under Section 148
                            The appellant contended that the CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 and the order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147. The reopening was argued to be illegal, void, and against the principles of natural justice. The appellant had disclosed all material facts necessary for the assessment during the first assessment.

                            Issue 3: Legitimacy of the addition under Section 68 for the sale of shares and the alleged bogus nature of the transaction
                            The appellant challenged the addition of INR 16,09,340/- under Section 68, arguing that the transaction of purchase and sale of shares was genuine and not bogus as alleged. It was asserted that the appellant was not confronted with the material evidence relied upon by the AO, and the assessment was framed in breach of natural justice principles. The AO had relied on irrelevant facts, conjectures, and assumptions without conclusive evidence proving the transaction as bogus.

                            Findings:

                            1. Order Passed in the Name of Deceased Person:
                            - The issue was not pursued further by the appellant during the hearing.

                            2. Reopening of Assessment:
                            - The issue was also not pursued further by the appellant during the hearing.

                            3. Addition under Section 68:
                            - The Tribunal found that the AO's findings were contrary to the material on record. The appellant had undertaken multiple purchase/sale transactions in shares, and the short-term capital gains were accepted in previous assessments without any doubts about the genuineness of the transactions.
                            - The AO did not conduct any independent inquiry and relied on the general modus operandi stated in the Investigation Wing, Kolkata's report without specific reference to the appellant's case.
                            - The shares were purchased and sold through the stock exchange, and the sale proceeds were received through banking channels. The AO failed to point out any defect or infirmity in the documents/explanation given by the appellant.
                            - The AO's conclusion that the transactions were sham and a colorable device to evade taxes was based on conjecture and surmises without any direct or circumstantial evidence.
                            - The Tribunal held that the addition of INR 16,09,340/- under Section 68 could not be sustained and was deleted. The appellant's grounds related to this issue were allowed.

                            Conclusion:
                            The appeal was partly allowed, with the addition under Section 68 being deleted. The Tribunal emphasized that judicial precedents should not be invoked without factual support and that the theory of human behavior and preponderance of probabilities cannot override the evidence produced by an assessee.
                            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