<?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>2025 (1) TMI 1287 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765223</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee regarding validity of reassessment under section 147 concerning alleged bogus long-term capital gains on shares. The tribunal found that lower authorities improperly relied solely on third-party information from CRIU module without conducting independent inquiry or providing direct evidence against the assessee. The assessee had purchased shares in September 2012 through account payee cheques from disclosed bank accounts, held dematerialized shares for over three years, and sold them through registered brokers on recognized stock exchanges after paying STT. The tribunal held no justification existed for denying section 10(38) exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1287 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765223</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee regarding validity of reassessment under section 147 concerning alleged bogus long-term capital gains on shares. The tribunal found that lower authorities improperly relied solely on third-party information from CRIU module without conducting independent inquiry or providing direct evidence against the assessee. The assessee had purchased shares in September 2012 through account payee cheques from disclosed bank accounts, held dematerialized shares for over three years, and sold them through registered brokers on recognized stock exchanges after paying STT. The tribunal held no justification existed for denying section 10(38) exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765223</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>