https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77068 The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals against the assessee for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, finding the share transfer genuine and not a colorable device to evade tax. Relying on precedent cases, the Court emphasized the distinction between tax planning and evasion, asserting the right of taxpayers to employ legal means to reduce tax liability. As no substantial question of law was identified, the appeals were not admitted, reinforcing the principle that legitimate tax planning is permissible within the bounds of the law. en-us Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 May 2026 12:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77068 The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals against the assessee for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, finding the share transfer genuine and not a colorable device to evade tax. Relying on precedent cases, the Court emphasized the distinction between tax planning and evasion, asserting the right of taxpayers to employ legal means to reduce tax liability. As no substantial question of law was identified, the appeals were not admitted, reinforcing the principle that legitimate tax planning is permissible within the bounds of the law. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77068