Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The article addresses the burden to prove genuineness of share transactions claimed as exempt LTCG under 10(38), holding that documentary records (contract notes, demat statements, bank payment/receipt evidence and exchange trades) can discharge the onus and defeat additions. It states that reliance on investigation reports, prima facie anomalies in company accounts, or extraordinary price movement, without material linking the taxpayer to price manipulation, recycling of funds or accommodation entries, is insufficient to treat exempt gains as unexplained income; therefore the exemption should be accepted absent direct nexus or corroborative inquiry.
The article addresses the burden to prove genuineness of share transactions claimed as exempt LTCG under 10(38), holding that documentary records (contract notes, demat statements, bank payment/receipt evidence and exchange trades) can discharge the onus and defeat additions. It states that reliance on investigation reports, prima facie anomalies in company accounts, or extraordinary price movement, without material linking the taxpayer to price manipulation, recycling of funds or accommodation entries, is insufficient to treat exempt gains as unexplained income; therefore the exemption should be accepted absent direct nexus or corroborative inquiry.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
