<?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 (7) TMI 889 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774821</link>
    <description>ITAT Ahmedabad upheld CIT(A)&#039;s decision dismissing Revenue&#039;s appeals in a penny stock transaction case. The court found AO&#039;s reopening under Section 147 improper as assessee had disclosed losses in original return, establishing no income escapement. AO&#039;s reasoning was self-contradictory since transactions were fully disclosed. Regarding short-term capital loss addition, ITAT confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s deletion finding no evidence of bogus transactions or cash exchange. All transactions occurred through recognized stock exchanges with proper documentation. AO&#039;s disallowance based on mere conjecture without substantive evidence was deemed incorrect.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:39:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=836075" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 889 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774821</link>
      <description>ITAT Ahmedabad upheld CIT(A)&#039;s decision dismissing Revenue&#039;s appeals in a penny stock transaction case. The court found AO&#039;s reopening under Section 147 improper as assessee had disclosed losses in original return, establishing no income escapement. AO&#039;s reasoning was self-contradictory since transactions were fully disclosed. Regarding short-term capital loss addition, ITAT confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s deletion finding no evidence of bogus transactions or cash exchange. All transactions occurred through recognized stock exchanges with proper documentation. AO&#039;s disallowance based on mere conjecture without substantive evidence was deemed incorrect.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774821</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>