https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312441 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C, which had rejected the assessee's Long Term Capital Gains claim on shares of M/s SRK Industries Ltd as bogus. The Tribunal emphasized the need for evidence-based decisions rather than relying on general reports, suspicions, or conjectures. The CIT(A)'s reliance on circumstantial evidence and general reports was deemed insufficient, as there was no direct material contradicting the assessee's evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the importance of specific evidence over generalizations. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Feb 2024 20:36:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312441 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C, which had rejected the assessee's Long Term Capital Gains claim on shares of M/s SRK Industries Ltd as bogus. The Tribunal emphasized the need for evidence-based decisions rather than relying on general reports, suspicions, or conjectures. The CIT(A)'s reliance on circumstantial evidence and general reports was deemed insufficient, as there was no direct material contradicting the assessee's evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the importance of specific evidence over generalizations. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312441