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...
ITAT Delhi deleted a ₹47 lakh bogus LTCG addition, holding that ‘human probability’ cannot override transactions conducted through stock exchange, demat, and banking channels. Mere high profit does not make a transaction bogus.
ITAT Pune held that reopening based on old investigation data was invalid where transactions were already verified under Section 153A. The Tribunal found the penny stock gains genuine as supported by Demat, bank, and STT records.
ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue’s appeal, upholding CIT(A)’s deletion of addition from a share sale, ruling the transaction genuine as no evidence proved the shares were ‘penny stock’ or rigged.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that denying effective cross-examination of key witnesses, like R.K. Kedia, violated natural justice, vitiating the income tax assessment in a bogus long-term capital gains (LTCG) commission case.
The ITAT Mumbai deleted an addition of ₹46 lakh in the Rekha Rajesh Jogani case, ruling that the Income Tax Department cannot rely solely on general ‘penny stock’ investigation reports to deny Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG).
ITAT Jabalpur upholds CIT(A)’s deletion of addition u/s 68; holds that mere reliance on Investigation Wing report without independent verification is unsustainable.
The ITAT Nagpur allowed the appeal of Bhivraj Mohanlal Jain, deleting the unexplained investment addition of lakhs under Section , ruling that the transactions were genuine intraday trading resulting in a marginal profit.
ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue’s appeal against Satya Prakash Gupta regarding an addition of ₹1.61 crore for alleged bogus Short Term Capital Loss, as tax effect was below CBDT’s monetary limit.
The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the deletion of a ₹1.17 Lakh addition made under Section 68 for alleged penny stock gains, ruling that the taxpayer had incurred a Short Term Capital Loss and had not claimed any exempt LTCG u/s 10(38),
ITAT Delhi dismisses Revenue appeal, holding an investor’s LTCG from stock exchange transactions as genuine, reaffirming “suspicion is not substitute for proof.”
