9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1545 - HC - Income TaxBogus LTCG - ITAT allowing exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 10(38) - Claim disallowed by the A.O. on the basis of evidence received from investigation wing treating sale of shares of M/s Sunrise Asian Ltd., as bogus and thereby considering the same as income from other sources? - HELD THAT - On perusal of the order of learned ITAT and reasonings given therein this court is of the view that the substantial questions of law, formulated above does not arise as ITAT has logically dealt questions of fact and law involved by way of reasoned order. We are of the view that learned ITAT has passed the order on consideration of material and relevant facts, logical conclusion has been arrived at and the same must be allowed to rest. There is no gross violation of principles of natural justice or failure of justice, no error has crept in the order impugned of learned ITAT. The Coordinate Bench of this court in Shri Sanjay Chhabra 2022 (4) TMI 1418 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT in the similar facts and circumstances has already taken a view that in the appeal at hand u/s 260A of the Act no substantial question of law arises.
Issues:
1. Exemption claimed under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Addition made on account of notional commission for obtaining accommodation entry. Analysis: Issue 1: Exemption claimed under Section 10(38) The appeal was filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowing exemption of Rs. 14431115 claimed by the assessee under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer disallowed the exemption based on evidence from the investigation wing, treating the sale of shares as bogus. The ITAT considered all facts of the case, finding that the assessee provided documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the transaction. The ITAT concluded that the Assessing Officer failed to produce contrary material evidence to rebut the claim, and manipulation allegations were not proven. The ITAT also distinguished previous judgments, emphasizing that the case involved multiple companies' shares, not just a single scrip. The court agreed with the ITAT's logical analysis, stating no substantial question of law arose. Issue 2: Addition for notional commission The second issue involved the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer for notional commission paid to obtain an accommodation entry for exempted long-term capital gain under Section 10(38). The revenue argued that the Assessing Officer's reasoning was justified, as the transaction was deemed bogus by the investigation wing due to accommodating bogus entries. However, the ITAT found that the assessee provided substantial documentary evidence, including bank statements and contract notes, to support the transaction's genuineness. The ITAT's decision was based on a thorough examination of facts and law, concluding that no substantial question of law warranted consideration. The court upheld the ITAT's reasoned order, dismissing the appeal under Section 260A of the Act. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the ITAT's decision, emphasizing the importance of considering material facts and arriving at logical conclusions in tax matters. The judgment highlighted the necessity for substantial legal questions and the absence of gross violations of natural justice for appeal consideration. The court's analysis focused on the genuineness of transactions, evidentiary support, and the application of relevant legal provisions under the Income Tax Act, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
|
