9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against order u/s 147 for AY 2000-01, challenge to notice u/s 148, treatment of long term capital gain as income from other sources.
Notice u/s 148: The appeal included a challenge to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ld. Authorised Representative did not press this ground, leading to its dismissal. Treatment of long term capital gain: The assessee declared Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 1,25,648/- from the sale of shares. However, the A.O. rejected the contention regarding the sale of shares through JRD Stock Broker, citing lack of supporting evidence. The A.O. found discrepancies in the documents provided and noted that the broker failed to comply with requests for information. The A.O. made additions totaling Rs. 1,34,432/-, including Rs. 1,500/- for unexplained expenditure on premium money paid to the broker. Confirmation by CIT(A): The CIT(A) confirmed the additions, stating that the shares' transactions were not reported to the Stock Exchanges and the broker was involved in providing bogus entries. The CIT(A) upheld the additions of Rs. 1,32,932/- and Rs. 1,500/-, emphasizing the lack of genuine share business by the broker. Appellant's arguments: The ld. Authorised Representative argued that the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.'s actions without proper consideration. The appellant cited various orders in favor of the assessee from ITAT, Agra Bench and others, supporting the genuineness of the transactions. Decision: After hearing both parties, it was found that the CIT(A) denied the opportunity for cross-examination of the broker, violating the principle of natural justice. The matter was sent back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, with directions to provide the assessee with the opportunity for cross-examination and to consider the evidence presented. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
|
