Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
The ITAT held that neither the initiation of reassessment proceedings nor the addition made by the AO u/s 68 can be sustained. The AO drew an inference from an investigation wing report on bogus long/short-term capital gains transactions involving penny stocks to reopen the assessment against the assessee without considering the assessee's business nature and inquiries during regular scrutiny assessment. The sole basis for reassessment and addition was the assessee's sale of shares identified as penny stocks, which the ITAT found untenable. Regarding the addition u/s 68, the ITAT noted the CIT(A)'s observation of a sudden steep share price rise during a recessive market was unfounded, as the AO did not refer to quoted share prices. The CIT(A) also overlooked that the assessee booked a business loss. Thus, the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that neither the initiation of reassessment proceedings nor the addition made by the AO u/s 68 can be sustained. The AO drew an inference from an investigation wing report on bogus long/short-term capital gains transactions involving penny stocks to reopen the assessment against the assessee without considering the assessee's business nature and inquiries during regular scrutiny assessment. The sole basis for reassessment and addition was the assessee's sale of shares identified as penny stocks, which the ITAT found untenable. Regarding the addition u/s 68, the ITAT noted the CIT(A)'s observation of a sudden steep share price rise during a recessive market was unfounded, as the AO did not refer to quoted share prices. The CIT(A) also overlooked that the assessee booked a business loss. Thus, the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.