<?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>2021 (7) TMI 493 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409651</link>
    <description>Long-term capital gains exemption on listed equity shares was accepted where purchase, holding, dematerialisation and sale were supported by contract notes, bank records, demat statements and securities transaction tax payment. In the absence of any specific defect in those documents, or cogent material linking the assessee to an alleged entry operator, broker manipulation or price-rigging, mere suspicion and general investigation material could not displace the evidence. Because the adverse material was not properly confronted and no meaningful rebuttal was made, the bogus penny-stock allegation failed. The additions under section 68 and the estimated commission addition were therefore deleted, and the exemption under section 10(38) was treated as genuine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2021 06:26:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649571" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 493 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409651</link>
      <description>Long-term capital gains exemption on listed equity shares was accepted where purchase, holding, dematerialisation and sale were supported by contract notes, bank records, demat statements and securities transaction tax payment. In the absence of any specific defect in those documents, or cogent material linking the assessee to an alleged entry operator, broker manipulation or price-rigging, mere suspicion and general investigation material could not displace the evidence. Because the adverse material was not properly confronted and no meaningful rebuttal was made, the bogus penny-stock allegation failed. The additions under section 68 and the estimated commission addition were therefore deleted, and the exemption under section 10(38) was treated as genuine.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409651</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>