9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (2) TMI 1527 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained/Undisclosed Long Term Capital Gain - deletion of addition - In that case the assessee claimed Long Term Capital Gain and claimed exemption u/s 054EA. The LTCG was shown on account of sale of shares through the brokers. The assessee submitted the copies of bills, share certificates, contract notes etc. during the course of assessment proceedings alongwith details of DD through which the sale proceeds has been received. It was also pointed out that the purchases were made through broking concern M/s. JRD Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. The A.O. noticed that the shares were purchased @ ₹ 4/- per share and sold @ ₹ 65/- to ₹ 84/- per share. The A.O. was of the view that the transactions were not genuine and are only accommodation entries. The broker pointed out that he was engaged in giving bogus entries for the purchase and sale of the shares on commission basis. He, therefore, made the addition. The assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A). HELD THAT - According to the CIT(A), no defect in share transactions being made by the appellant and as such no adverse inference is drawn. Appellant had done the same as would be done by any person with a prudent mind in order to sell his commodity. It is evident from the record that the AO failed to establish the nexus between the sale proceeds of the shares and so called unaccounted money of the appellant which according to him is mere a bogus entry taken from the broker. Neither the statement of the broker or any other documentary evidence is on record from which it could be established that the appellant had taken entry from the broker M/s J.R.D Stock Broker (P) Ltd. Thus in view of the facts and the law, I hold that on merit the addition is wholly unjustified and is hereby deleted. Therefore, we are of the view that the CIT(A) was right in conclusion that the assessee has dealt in these shares and these transactions cannot be held bogus. The deletion of addition is confirmed. Hence, the assessee has been successful in proving the long term capital gain earned by him in this case. He has also established that he is exempt from tax qua long term capital gains as has been claimed.
Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 9,40,657/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained/undisclosed Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG). Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 9,40,657/- on Account of Unexplained/Undisclosed Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG): The Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross Objection relate to the deletion of an addition of Rs. 9,40,657/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unexplained/undisclosed LTCG. The assessee provided detailed documentation to support the LTCG, including purchase and sale details of shares of Grives Hotels Ltd., broker details, contract notes, sale bills, and statements of accounts. The AO, however, was not satisfied and made the addition under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, asserting that the assessee could not prove the sale of shares and genuineness of the receipts. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that the AO did not provide any material evidence against the assessee to suggest that the transactions were bogus or accommodation entries. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee had made a complete disclosure of the capital gain in the return of income and had provided all necessary documents to prove the genuineness of the transactions. The AO's failure to produce the broker and the purchaser of the shares was deemed insufficient to treat the capital gain as unexplained money. The CIT(A) further referenced several judicial precedents, including decisions by the ITAT Agra Bench and the Hon'ble P&H High Court, which supported the genuineness of similar share transactions. The AO's reliance on the modus operandi in the case of Shri Ashok Kumar Lavania was also dismissed, as the ITAT had upheld the genuineness of the LTCG in that case. The Tribunal, upon review, found that the case of the assessee was covered by previous decisions of the Tribunal, including the case of Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal vs. ACIT, where similar transactions were deemed genuine. The Tribunal noted that the AO had not provided the assessee with an opportunity to cross-examine the broker, whose statements were recorded at the back of the assessee, thus violating principles of natural justice. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO failed to establish any nexus between the sale proceeds of the shares and the so-called unaccounted money of the assessee. The documentary evidence provided by the assessee, including contract notes, sale and purchase bills, and share certificates, were not rebutted by the AO. The Tribunal also highlighted that the AO's suspicion of abnormal share price increase was not sufficient to deem the transactions as bogus, as share market fluctuations are common. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition was justified, as the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the genuineness of the transactions, and the AO had not provided any concrete evidence to the contrary. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the Cross Objection by the assessee was also dismissed as not pressed. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 11.02.2011).
|
