Supreme Court dismissed SLP challenging order of High Court
Kuntala Mohapatra vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 5269/2024
The assessee submitted its return for the relevant year. Subsequently, after a survey, the assessee filed a revised return and claimed exemption for long-term capital gains on shares under section 10(38). However, the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s plea and made additions under sections 68 and 69 based on statements from ‘entry operators’. The Commissioner (Appeals), on appeal, accepted the assessee’s claim. The Commissioner noted that the shares were purchased through Account Payee Cheques, held in a Demat Account for over 12 months, and sold through a recognized stock exchange after payment of security transaction tax. The Tribunal also upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal emphasized the assessee’s right to correct mistakes and criticized the Assessing Officer’s reliance on statements from ‘entry operators’ to support the additions under sections 68 and 69. The statements were recorded in unrelated proceedings before the survey on the assessee, and the assessee was not given an opportunity to challenge or cross-examine the providers of those statements. On the revenue’s appeal, the High Court confirmed the order of the Tribunal. Furthermore, the Supreme Court dismissed the revenue’s Special Leave Petition to interfere with the High Court’s order.
To Download official order, click here. –
“The site is for information purposes only and does not provide legal advice of any sort. Viewing this site, receipt of information contained on this site, or the transmission of information from or to this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship.
The information on this site is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice.”