https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350327 The ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee regarding treatment of Long Term Capital Gains as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The tribunal held that where DMAT account and contract notes showed share transaction details and the Assessing Officer failed to prove the transactions were bogus, capital gains could not be treated as unaccounted income. The decision was supported by Bombay HC precedent in Shyam R. Pawar case and Jharkhand HC ruling in Arun Kumar Agarwal (HUF) case, which established that bona fide share transactions through brokers cannot be deemed bogus merely because the broker violated SEBI regulations. The tribunal followed established jurisprudence protecting genuine capital gains transactions from being reclassified as unexplained income without concrete evidence of fraud. en-us Mon, 18 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jul 2025 17:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350327 The ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee regarding treatment of Long Term Capital Gains as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The tribunal held that where DMAT account and contract notes showed share transaction details and the Assessing Officer failed to prove the transactions were bogus, capital gains could not be treated as unaccounted income. The decision was supported by Bombay HC precedent in Shyam R. Pawar case and Jharkhand HC ruling in Arun Kumar Agarwal (HUF) case, which established that bona fide share transactions through brokers cannot be deemed bogus merely because the broker violated SEBI regulations. The tribunal followed established jurisprudence protecting genuine capital gains transactions from being reclassified as unexplained income without concrete evidence of fraud. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350327