https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465373 The dominant issue was whether exemption under s.10(38) could be denied by treating the assessee's long-term capital gains on sale of listed shares as bogus accommodation entries. The Tribunal held that the transaction involved the same scrip and substantially identical facts as in an earlier ITAT decision concerning a related assessee, where the AO's allegations were examined and additions were deleted; applying judicial consistency, the denial of s.10(38) exemption was set aside. Consequentially, the related addition under s.69C for alleged commission paid to arrange accommodation entries, being premised on the same disbelieved gains, was also deleted. en-us Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Dec 2025 22:30:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465373 The dominant issue was whether exemption under s.10(38) could be denied by treating the assessee's long-term capital gains on sale of listed shares as bogus accommodation entries. The Tribunal held that the transaction involved the same scrip and substantially identical facts as in an earlier ITAT decision concerning a related assessee, where the AO's allegations were examined and additions were deleted; applying judicial consistency, the denial of s.10(38) exemption was set aside. Consequentially, the related addition under s.69C for alleged commission paid to arrange accommodation entries, being premised on the same disbelieved gains, was also deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465373