Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Dilip Bhanverlal Dangi (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2014-15
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Dilip Bhanverlal Dangi (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Penny Stock LTCG Addition U/s 68 Deleted – Documentary Evidence Accepted; Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof – ITAT Mumbai The assessee (HUF) claimed exemption u/s 10(38) on long-term capital gains of ₹19.41 lakh arising from sale of shares of Radford Global Ltd. The AO, relying on investigation reports alleging penny stock manipulation, rejected the exemption and treated entire sale proceeds of ₹19.97 lakh as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. CIT(A) upheld the addition. Before ITAT, the assessee demonstrated that shares were purchase...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930