Permanent Establishment and Business Connection: foreign consultancy receipts not attributable where no fixed base or corporate veil piercing establis...
Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
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.