Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
The AT, on appeal from an adjudication alleging front-running under Section 12(A)(c) of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(a), 3(d), 4(1) and 4(2)(q) of the PFUTP Regulations, concluded that the charge was not established on the preponderance of probabilities and allowed the appeal. The Tribunal found that an external forensic report obtained during the investigation implicated connections between the complainant and a third party and that the adjudicating officer's failure to address that report warranted an adverse inference against the regulator. Absent satisfactory treatment of that material, the appellant's alleged advance trading could not be proved and the penalty was set aside.
The AT, on appeal from an adjudication alleging front-running under Section 12(A)(c) of the SEBI Act and Regulations 3(a), 3(d), 4(1) and 4(2)(q) of the PFUTP Regulations, concluded that the charge was not established on the preponderance of probabilities and allowed the appeal. The Tribunal found that an external forensic report obtained during the investigation implicated connections between the complainant and a third party and that the adjudicating officer's failure to address that report warranted an adverse inference against the regulator. Absent satisfactory treatment of that material, the appellant's alleged advance trading could not be proved and the penalty was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
