MANAN ARATI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the transaction of sale of Foodlink shares was supported by documentary evidence, including a SEBI PMS registration, account statements, and a valuation report. Therefore, the sale proceeds could not be treated as an unexplained cash credit under Section 68, and the long-term capital loss was allowed.
What were the facts?
The assessee sold shares of Foodlink Services India Pvt. Ltd. and claimed a long-term capital loss. The Assessing Officer treated the sale consideration as an unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition and disallowed the capital loss.
What were the issues?
Whether the sale consideration of unlisted shares transacted through a SEBI-registered PMS can be treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, and if the consequential long-term capital loss is allowable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the Order, dated 27/01/2026, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] whereby the Learned CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 27/03/2024, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] for the Assessment Year 2022-2023. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (the "Ld. CIT
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026