https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768947 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal regarding addition under section 68 and rejection of exemption claim under section 10(38) on sale of listed equity shares. The tribunal found the case similar to Delhi HC's decision in Vipin Jain involving Alps Motor Finance Ltd. scrip. The AO failed to provide cogent material to establish that share transactions were bogus or sham arrangements. SEBI had not highlighted any irregularities in the company's scrip transactions. The tribunal concluded no adverse evidence existed to establish fictitious long-term capital gains claims, following Delhi HC precedent in PCIT v. Krishna Devi that preponderance of probabilities cannot justify rejecting party evidence. en-us Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2025 08:38:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768947 ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal regarding addition under section 68 and rejection of exemption claim under section 10(38) on sale of listed equity shares. The tribunal found the case similar to Delhi HC's decision in Vipin Jain involving Alps Motor Finance Ltd. scrip. The AO failed to provide cogent material to establish that share transactions were bogus or sham arrangements. SEBI had not highlighted any irregularities in the company's scrip transactions. The tribunal concluded no adverse evidence existed to establish fictitious long-term capital gains claims, following Delhi HC precedent in PCIT v. Krishna Devi that preponderance of probabilities cannot justify rejecting party evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768947