Condonation of Delay denied: communication lapses and corporate restructuring found insufficient; prolonged inaction and lack of bona fides led to ref...
Export Support intervention INSIGHT launched to provide non financial capacity building, trade intelligence and pilot support with defined funding and...
Bogus long-term capital gains additions on listed shares under section 68 cannot be sustained on suspicion alone where the assessee produces purchase records, demat statements, stock exchange sale documents and banking evidence, and the Revenue brings no specific rebuttal. The Tribunal held that general investigation inputs and allegations of penny stock accommodation entries do not displace documentary proof unless there is cogent material linking the assessee to a sham or manipulated transaction. On similar facts, including decisions involving the same scrip, the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Bogus long-term capital gains additions on listed shares under section 68 cannot be sustained on suspicion alone where the assessee produces purchase records, demat statements, stock exchange sale documents and banking evidence, and the Revenue brings no specific rebuttal. The Tribunal held that general investigation inputs and allegations of penny stock accommodation entries do not displace documentary proof unless there is cogent material linking the assessee to a sham or manipulated transaction. On similar facts, including decisions involving the same scrip, the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.