Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
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.