https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770156 Document discusses the evidentiary requirements for sustaining an addition under section 68 in a long-term capital gain share transaction case. The assessee produced purchase and sale documents, banking records, demat evidence and contract notes, showing acquisition and sale through recorded channels, while the Revenue relied on investigation material alleging penny stock manipulation. Because the assessee was not supplied the statements or material used against her and was denied cross-examination, the assessment was found inconsistent with natural justice. The addition was deleted and the long-term capital gain claim was accepted. en-us Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jul 2026 15:05:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770156 Document discusses the evidentiary requirements for sustaining an addition under section 68 in a long-term capital gain share transaction case. The assessee produced purchase and sale documents, banking records, demat evidence and contract notes, showing acquisition and sale through recorded channels, while the Revenue relied on investigation material alleging penny stock manipulation. Because the assessee was not supplied the statements or material used against her and was denied cross-examination, the assessment was found inconsistent with natural justice. The addition was deleted and the long-term capital gain claim was accepted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770156