Condonation of Delay: Tribunal directed condonation where rectification proceedings were pursued, ordering merits adjudication after opportunity to be...
Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
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.