Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
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.