ITAT Quashes Reopening Based on “Borrowed Satisfaction” in LTCG Accommodation Entry Case:

ITAT Quashes Reopening Based on “Borrowed Satisfaction” in LTCG Accommodation Entry Case

Reassessment under Section 147 struck down where AO relied solely on Insight Portal inputs without linking assessee to price manipulation

ITAT Quashes Reopening Based Only on Insight Portal Inputs in Bogus LTCG Case

authorMeetu KumaridateJan 19, 2026
Last update on Jan 19, 2026
ITAT Quashes Reopening Based on “Borrowed Satisfaction” in LTCG Accommodation Entry Case The assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family, filed its returns for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19, declaring nominal income and claiming exemption on long-term capital gains arising from the sale of shares of M/s Kushal Tradelink Limited.
NFRA Cracks Down on Audit File Lapses: 60-Day Completion Rule, 7-Day Submission Deadline, Many More
Based on information received through the Insight Portal regarding a search conducted in the Kushal Group, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessments under Section 147. The AO treated the exempt LTCG as unexplained income under Section 68 and completed reassessment by disallowing the exemption under Section 10(38). The CIT(A) upheld the reassessment as well as the additions. Issue Before ITAT: Whether reassessment proceedings started based only on Insight Portal information, without independent application of mind or specific linking the assessee to alleged share price manipulation, were valid in law.
NFRA Cracks Down on Audit File Lapses: 60-Day Completion Rule, 7-Day Submission Deadline, Many More
ITAT's Ruling: The ITAT held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as the reasons recorded by the AO were vague and based on borrowed satisfaction. The Tribunal noted that the AO failed to show how the assessee was involved in the manipulation of the scrip or how the transactions were not genuine. There was no tangible material brought on record to doubt the purchase or sale of shares or to establish a tax nexus. Since the reopening itself was held to be without jurisdiction, the assessment orders could not survive. Thus, both appeals of the assessee for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19 were allowed, and the additions were quashed. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2157
Up Next

Loading suggestions…