<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (10) TMI 174 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252040</link>
    <description>The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s finding that the assessee&#039;s transactions in shares of Prime Capital Market were not genuine. The purchase was not supported by proper documentation, payment was not made by cheque, and shares could not be cross-verified. The shares were penny stocks declared by SEBI, and the broker involved was indicted for price manipulation. The tribunal applied the test of human probabilities and rejected the claim of speculation gains and the purchase and sale of shares. Consequently, the transactions were treated as cash credits rather than long-term capital gains. The order of the AO was confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2025 12:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 174 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252040</link>
      <description>The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s finding that the assessee&#039;s transactions in shares of Prime Capital Market were not genuine. The purchase was not supported by proper documentation, payment was not made by cheque, and shares could not be cross-verified. The shares were penny stocks declared by SEBI, and the broker involved was indicted for price manipulation. The tribunal applied the test of human probabilities and rejected the claim of speculation gains and the purchase and sale of shares. Consequently, the transactions were treated as cash credits rather than long-term capital gains. The order of the AO was confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252040</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>