https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791682 A penny stock allegation, by itself, was insufficient to treat long-term capital gain on share sale as bogus or as unexplained money under Section 69A. The assessee supported the transaction with purchase and sale records, contract notes, demat statements and banking trail, while the Revenue failed to establish any nexus between the assessee or its broker and price rigging, sham arrangement or premeditated trading. In the absence of material dislodging the documentary evidence, the addition was not justified and the deletion by the first appellate authority was upheld. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 May 2026 09:15:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791682 A penny stock allegation, by itself, was insufficient to treat long-term capital gain on share sale as bogus or as unexplained money under Section 69A. The assessee supported the transaction with purchase and sale records, contract notes, demat statements and banking trail, while the Revenue failed to establish any nexus between the assessee or its broker and price rigging, sham arrangement or premeditated trading. In the absence of material dislodging the documentary evidence, the addition was not justified and the deletion by the first appellate authority was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791682