{"id":64972,"date":"2026-10-07T11:15:25","date_gmt":"2026-10-07T05:45:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ganita-technologies-services-pvt-ltd-successor-in-interest-to-vocation-invt-fin-co-pvt-ltd-v-acitmum-trib-www-itatonline-org\/"},"modified":"2026-10-07T11:15:25","modified_gmt":"2026-10-07T05:45:25","slug":"ganita-technologies-services-pvt-ltd-successor-in-interest-to-vocation-invt-fin-co-pvt-ltd-v-acitmum-trib-www-itatonline-org","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ganita-technologies-services-pvt-ltd-successor-in-interest-to-vocation-invt-fin-co-pvt-ltd-v-acitmum-trib-www-itatonline-org\/","title":{"rendered":"Ganita Technologies &#038; Services Pvt. Ltd. (Successor in interest to Vocation Invt. &#038; Fin. Co. Pvt. Ltd.) v. ACIT(Mum.)(Trib.) [www.itatonline.org]"},"content":{"rendered":"<div>\n<p>The Assessing Officer treated loss of Rs.1,06,40,281 arising from alleged Client Code Modification transactions as artificially shifted loss, relying principally on Investigation Wing material and the pattern and magnitude of the modifications. The Tribunal observed that CCM was a facility available to stock-brokers for correction of genuine errors and that mere modification of client codes could not, by itself, establish that the resultant loss was fictitious. The assessee was not a stock-broker and there was no material showing that it had instructed the broker to make the modifications or had entered into any pre-arranged arrangement for shifting taxable losses. There was also no evidence of exchange of money, cash consideration, commission or other benefit, nor any specific relationship or collusion with the concerned parties. The Revenue had not brought sufficient assessee-specific corroborative material to establish that the assessee deliberately participated in a colourable arrangement. The Tribunal held that general findings regarding misuse of CCM could not be mechanically applied to the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs.1,06,40,281. <strong>(<\/strong><strong>AY. 2009-10) (ITA No. 3222\/Mum\/2026 dt. 18-08-2026)<\/strong><b><\/b><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S.143(3): Assessment &#8211; Business income: Client Code Modification \u2013 Alleged shifting of losses through CCM \u2013 Mere modification of client code by broker could not establish that resultant loss was fictitious or arranged for tax purposes \u2013 Assessee not being a stock-broker could not independently undertake CCM \u2013 No material to establish that assessee instructed broker to modify client codes or that any pre-arranged understanding existed \u2013 No evidence of exchange of money, cash consideration, commission or other benefit \u2013 General investigation regarding misuse of CCM could not automatically be applied to assessee without assessee-specific corroborative material \u2013 Suspicion, however strong, could not take the place of evidence \u2013 Addition of Rs.1,06,40,281 deleted.[ S.28(i)] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64972","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gTW","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64972","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=64972"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64972\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64973,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64972\/revisions\/64973"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=64972"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=64972"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=64972"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}