<?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 (11) TMI 1671 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782203</link>
    <description>ITAT Rajkot allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and quashed the PCIT&#039;s order passed u/s 263. It held that the AO had conducted adequate enquiry regarding purchase and sale of shares, including bank statements, demat account entries, loan details, STT payment, broker confirmations, and other supporting documents. The assessee was found to be a regular investor, and the transactions in shares of listed companies were routed through banking channels and duly evidenced. As there was no allegation that the documents were fictitious, the AO&#039;s view was held to be a plausible one. Consequently, the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:43:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867211" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1671 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782203</link>
      <description>ITAT Rajkot allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and quashed the PCIT&#039;s order passed u/s 263. It held that the AO had conducted adequate enquiry regarding purchase and sale of shares, including bank statements, demat account entries, loan details, STT payment, broker confirmations, and other supporting documents. The assessee was found to be a regular investor, and the transactions in shares of listed companies were routed through banking channels and duly evidenced. As there was no allegation that the documents were fictitious, the AO&#039;s view was held to be a plausible one. Consequently, the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>