Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
