<?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>2023 (4) TMI 1411 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461598</link>
    <description>ITAT Indore dismissed revenue&#039;s appeal regarding denial of LTCG on share transactions. Assessee purchased shares through penalized broker but provided complete documentation including purchase/sale records, account payee cheques, and demat account details. Shares were held for four years with only partial sale while remaining quantity carried forward. AO found no documentary defects and transactions occurred through recognized stock exchange. ITAT held that SEBI penalty against broker was irrelevant as broker&#039;s role ended after initial purchase. CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of addition was upheld, with tribunal noting each penny stock case depends on specific facts and evidence presented.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:00:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=814470" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 1411 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461598</link>
      <description>ITAT Indore dismissed revenue&#039;s appeal regarding denial of LTCG on share transactions. Assessee purchased shares through penalized broker but provided complete documentation including purchase/sale records, account payee cheques, and demat account details. Shares were held for four years with only partial sale while remaining quantity carried forward. AO found no documentary defects and transactions occurred through recognized stock exchange. ITAT held that SEBI penalty against broker was irrelevant as broker&#039;s role ended after initial purchase. CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of addition was upheld, with tribunal noting each penny stock case depends on specific facts and evidence presented.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461598</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>