<?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>Documentary proof of share transactions defeats penny stock-based additions absent specific evidence or cross-examination</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100532</link>
    <description>Documentary evidence of purchase, holding and sale of listed shares, including contract notes, demat records and bank statements, was sufficient to discharge the initial onus of genuineness. General investigation-wing material on alleged penny stock accommodation entries could not sustain an addition under section 68 without independent inquiry or specific adverse evidence linking the assessee or broker to price manipulation. Denial of cross-examination of the persons whose statements were relied on further weakened the revenue case. As the section 68 addition failed, the consequential commission addition under section 69C also fell and was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Documentary proof of share transactions defeats penny stock-based additions absent specific evidence or cross-examination</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100532</link>
      <description>Documentary evidence of purchase, holding and sale of listed shares, including contract notes, demat records and bank statements, was sufficient to discharge the initial onus of genuineness. General investigation-wing material on alleged penny stock accommodation entries could not sustain an addition under section 68 without independent inquiry or specific adverse evidence linking the assessee or broker to price manipulation. Denial of cross-examination of the persons whose statements were relied on further weakened the revenue case. As the section 68 addition failed, the consequential commission addition under section 69C also fell and was deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>