https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401941 The High Court set aside the Tribunal's decision to remand a case involving the genuineness of share transactions under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that remanding should be an exception, not routine, and the Tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons for the remand. The Court found the transaction to be a sham, lacking genuine documentation and evidence. The burden of proof lay with the assessee, who failed to establish the transaction's authenticity. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, reinstating the CIT(A)'s order and highlighting the inadequacy of the Tribunal's decision. en-us Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Dec 2020 08:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401941 The High Court set aside the Tribunal's decision to remand a case involving the genuineness of share transactions under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that remanding should be an exception, not routine, and the Tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons for the remand. The Court found the transaction to be a sham, lacking genuine documentation and evidence. The burden of proof lay with the assessee, who failed to establish the transaction's authenticity. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, reinstating the CIT(A)'s order and highlighting the inadequacy of the Tribunal's decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401941