https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760392 The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the PCIT's revision order under Section 263, finding the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. The assessee claimed long-term capital gains from sale of GCM Securities Ltd. shares, classified as penny stock. The AO failed to conduct adequate inquiry into the genuineness of transactions despite volatile price fluctuations and suspicious trading patterns. Following Supreme Court precedent in SEBI v. Rakhi Trading, the tribunal applied preponderance of probabilities test, noting abnormal price movements without corresponding market demand indicated manipulative objectives. The tribunal rejected the assessee's argument that cheque payment and STT compliance established transaction genuineness, citing multiple adverse evidences. The matter was remanded to AO for fresh assessment with proper inquiry and adequate hearing opportunity for the assessee. en-us Tue, 24 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2024 13:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760392 The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the PCIT's revision order under Section 263, finding the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. The assessee claimed long-term capital gains from sale of GCM Securities Ltd. shares, classified as penny stock. The AO failed to conduct adequate inquiry into the genuineness of transactions despite volatile price fluctuations and suspicious trading patterns. Following Supreme Court precedent in SEBI v. Rakhi Trading, the tribunal applied preponderance of probabilities test, noting abnormal price movements without corresponding market demand indicated manipulative objectives. The tribunal rejected the assessee's argument that cheque payment and STT compliance established transaction genuineness, citing multiple adverse evidences. The matter was remanded to AO for fresh assessment with proper inquiry and adequate hearing opportunity for the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 24 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760392