https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756717 ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the assessee's rectification application challenging additions under Section 68 for bogus LTCG and unexplained cash credits involving penny stocks. The Tribunal held that determination of penny stock status lies with BSE or investigation agencies, not the Tribunal. The Investigation Directorate, Kolkata's report identifying Unno Industries Ltd. as a penny stock was upheld, following HC precedent in PCIT v. Swati Bajaj. The Tribunal found no apparent mistake in its original order and ruled that Section 254(2) cannot be used to review orders on merit, only to rectify apparent mistakes from records. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Aug 2024 09:09:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756717 ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the assessee's rectification application challenging additions under Section 68 for bogus LTCG and unexplained cash credits involving penny stocks. The Tribunal held that determination of penny stock status lies with BSE or investigation agencies, not the Tribunal. The Investigation Directorate, Kolkata's report identifying Unno Industries Ltd. as a penny stock was upheld, following HC precedent in PCIT v. Swati Bajaj. The Tribunal found no apparent mistake in its original order and ruled that Section 254(2) cannot be used to review orders on merit, only to rectify apparent mistakes from records. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756717