<?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>2020 (10) TMI 299 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399325</link>
    <description>The Gujarat High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision for the assessment year 2014-15. The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s ruling that the assessee had adequately proven the legitimacy of transactions with alleged bogus companies, providing relevant details and maintaining shares in the account post-capital gain. The absence of evidence from the Investigation Wing and lack of cross-examination opportunities further supported the assessee&#039;s position. The Court concluded that the issue did not raise a substantial question of law under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2020 11:46:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=624447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 299 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399325</link>
      <description>The Gujarat High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision for the assessment year 2014-15. The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s ruling that the assessee had adequately proven the legitimacy of transactions with alleged bogus companies, providing relevant details and maintaining shares in the account post-capital gain. The absence of evidence from the Investigation Wing and lack of cross-examination opportunities further supported the assessee&#039;s position. The Court concluded that the issue did not raise a substantial question of law under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>