Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad confirms Section 68 addition of ₹93.92 lakh for bogus LTCG from Kushal Tradelink shares, rejecting the appeal bas...
Income Tax : Penny stocks, often associated with small, illiquid companies, have been a subject of concern due to their susceptibility to price...
Income Tax : Introduction: The assessee has been taking a common argument against the addition on account of penny stock. The said argument rev...
Income Tax : The provision for exemption of long term capital gains from shares requiring payment of securities transaction tax has been taken ...
Income Tax : It is a very well-known fact that High court only entertains question of law and Income tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) is the last ...
Income Tax : ITAT ruled that genuine sale proceeds supported by books, bank records and purchaser details cannot be treated as unexplained cash...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that an Investigation Wing report alone cannot justify an addition under Section 68 without independent verific...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the addition under Section 68 could not be sustained because the assessee produced complete documentary evi...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer failed to produce any material establishing a connection between the assessee and the all...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT sustained the addition arising from the sale of listed shares after finding discrepancies in purchase records, incl...
The tribunal ruled that reliance only on an investigation report without independent evidence cannot justify treating LTCG as bogus. Additions under Section 68 and commission were deleted.
The Tribunal held that mere classification of shares as penny stock is insufficient to deny LTCG exemption. In absence of evidence linking the assessee to manipulation, the addition under Section 69A was deleted.
The Tribunal held that disallowance of loss based on alleged penny stock manipulation was not justified without corroborative evidence. It found that transactions were supported by demat and banking records.
The issue involved denial of LTCG exemption based on allegations of penny stock manipulation. The Tribunal held that without direct evidence or nexus, such additions cannot be sustained.
The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose from the ITAT order deleting LTCG additions. It ruled that factual findings based on evidence cannot be disturbed without legal error.
The Tribunal held that LTCG cannot be treated as bogus merely based on investigation reports. It ruled that documented transactions through banking and stock exchange channels prove genuineness.
The ITAT held that reopening was invalid as it was based on the same material already examined during the original assessment. It ruled that reassessment cannot be used to review a concluded issue.
The Tribunal held that long-term capital gains cannot be treated as bogus based solely on investigation reports. In absence of independent inquiry or evidence, the addition was deleted.
The case involved addition of share sale proceeds treated as bogus based on investigation reports. The Tribunal held that no direct evidence linked the assessee to manipulation. It ruled that documented transactions through banking and demat channels cannot be disregarded without proof.
The Tribunal held that the sale of shares after holding them for nearly ten years could not be treated as a bogus penny stock transaction due to lack of evidence of manipulation.
