https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465265 In penny stock addition disputes, the Court treated the issue as covered by an earlier coordinate bench decision and held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal's findings were based on material on record and showed no absence of evidence, disregard of material evidence, or burden shifting. It also stated that an addition cannot be sustained solely on a retracted statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without corroborative admissible material. The revenue's challenge to the Tribunal's view therefore failed. en-us Tue, 17 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:19:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465265 In penny stock addition disputes, the Court treated the issue as covered by an earlier coordinate bench decision and held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal's findings were based on material on record and showed no absence of evidence, disregard of material evidence, or burden shifting. It also stated that an addition cannot be sustained solely on a retracted statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without corroborative admissible material. The revenue's challenge to the Tribunal's view therefore failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465265