https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783965 Whether the claimed exempt LTCG under s.10(38) on sale of a listed scrip was genuine or represented unexplained cash credit under s.68 turned on alleged price manipulation and the assessee's status as a beneficiary. The AO relied primarily on an Investigation Wing report and abnormal price movement to treat the LTCG as bogus. The Tribunal held that additional material, including SEBI findings indicating misuse of preference share capital, siphoning of funds, and misrepresentation of business affairs, required a fuller fact analysis to test the nexus between such findings, price rigging, and the assessee's claim; earlier ITAT orders on the same scrip were distinguishable for want of SEBI material. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after obtaining and examining the SEBI report and granting hearing, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 03 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783965 Whether the claimed exempt LTCG under s.10(38) on sale of a listed scrip was genuine or represented unexplained cash credit under s.68 turned on alleged price manipulation and the assessee's status as a beneficiary. The AO relied primarily on an Investigation Wing report and abnormal price movement to treat the LTCG as bogus. The Tribunal held that additional material, including SEBI findings indicating misuse of preference share capital, siphoning of funds, and misrepresentation of business affairs, required a fuller fact analysis to test the nexus between such findings, price rigging, and the assessee's claim; earlier ITAT orders on the same scrip were distinguishable for want of SEBI material. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after obtaining and examining the SEBI report and granting hearing, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783965