Cooperative society deposits, member-interest TDS exemption and credit-facility deduction claims require verification through records and supporting e...
Customs jurisdiction over EPCG condition breaches survives export-obligation discharge certificates, requiring alleged fraud and misdeclaration to be ...
Contractual tolerance requires consideration; breach recoveries, qualifying public infrastructure services and road works escape service tax liability...
Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
HC upheld the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO on account of alleged unexplained income from sale of shares of Global Capital Markets Ltd. The HC held that the AO's addition was based solely on unsubstantiated third-party information regarding penny stock transactions, without disclosing the source or material to the assessee and without conducting any independent inquiry. The assessee had demonstrably purchased the shares in 2003 and sold them in 2010 through a recognized stock exchange after payment of STT, negating the allegation of short-term accommodation entries. As the transaction was supported by proper documentation and the Revenue failed to prove that the consideration was bogus or that the entities were fictitious, the HC found no perversity in the CIT(A)'s reasoning and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
HC upheld the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO on account of alleged unexplained income from sale of shares of Global Capital Markets Ltd. The HC held that the AO's addition was based solely on unsubstantiated third-party information regarding penny stock transactions, without disclosing the source or material to the assessee and without conducting any independent inquiry. The assessee had demonstrably purchased the shares in 2003 and sold them in 2010 through a recognized stock exchange after payment of STT, negating the allegation of short-term accommodation entries. As the transaction was supported by proper documentation and the Revenue failed to prove that the consideration was bogus or that the entities were fictitious, the HC found no perversity in the CIT(A)'s reasoning and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
