https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250125 A genuine share transfer cannot be treated as a colourable device merely because the sale price is below an earlier rights-issue price. The Delhi HC noted that the rights issue was a capital-raising exercise in a loss-making company, while the transfer involved a different transaction between shareholders. Absence of common control, common management, or evidence of undeclared or secondary consideration supported the declared sale price. Regulatory approvals based on the valuation report also weighed against the allegation of sham consideration. The capital loss was therefore not disallowed, and the Revenue's appeals failed. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Aug 2014 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250125 A genuine share transfer cannot be treated as a colourable device merely because the sale price is below an earlier rights-issue price. The Delhi HC noted that the rights issue was a capital-raising exercise in a loss-making company, while the transfer involved a different transaction between shareholders. Absence of common control, common management, or evidence of undeclared or secondary consideration supported the declared sale price. Regulatory approvals based on the valuation report also weighed against the allegation of sham consideration. The capital loss was therefore not disallowed, and the Revenue's appeals failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250125