<?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>Addition of bogus LTCG disallowed due to off-market purchase in cash. Exemption denied as payments were non-verifiable. Upheld by ITAT.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78800</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the addition u/s 68 for alleged bogus Long Term Capital Gains due to off-market cash purchase of shares. The taxpayer&#039;s claim for deduction u/s 10(38) was disallowed as the purchase payments lacked verifiable proof through normal banking channels. Despite holding the shares for over a year and paying STT on sale, the exemption was denied due to unverifiable cash purchases. The Tribunal found the transactions suspicious, considering the lack of credible documentation and the taxpayer&#039;s atypical share investment behavior. The decision affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling against the taxpayer, emphasizing the need for proper sourcing evidence in such cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:37:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:37:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=757442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Addition of bogus LTCG disallowed due to off-market purchase in cash. Exemption denied as payments were non-verifiable. Upheld by ITAT.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78800</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the addition u/s 68 for alleged bogus Long Term Capital Gains due to off-market cash purchase of shares. The taxpayer&#039;s claim for deduction u/s 10(38) was disallowed as the purchase payments lacked verifiable proof through normal banking channels. Despite holding the shares for over a year and paying STT on sale, the exemption was denied due to unverifiable cash purchases. The Tribunal found the transactions suspicious, considering the lack of credible documentation and the taxpayer&#039;s atypical share investment behavior. The decision affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling against the taxpayer, emphasizing the need for proper sourcing evidence in such cases.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:37:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78800</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>