9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 970 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - addition u/s 68 - Held that - Reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act needs to be quashed as there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action. Further even on merits also assessee has proved genuineness of the transaction by providing necessary details and documents in the form of contract note, demat a/c, bank statement and NSE details and proved that the impugned transaction was not entered through accommodation entry provider namely Mahasagar Securities Pvt. ltd. and others. See Shri Pratik Suryakant Shah & others 2017 (2) TMI 463 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Justification of reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act. 2. Treatment of ?4,50,778/- as income from other sources versus unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act. 3. Validity of reassessment proceedings and the subsequent annulment of the assessment. 4. Deletion of the addition of ?4,50,778/-. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Justification of Reopening the Assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act: The case was reopened based on information from the Investigation Department regarding a search conducted on Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. and Alliance Intermediaries Network Pvt. Ltd., controlled by Mukesh M. Choksi. The assessee filed necessary details and evidence supporting various sources of income, including a long-term capital gain of ?4,20,529/- from the sale of shares of Jai Corporation Ltd. The Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice, questioning the genuineness of the transactions, alleging that the transactions were sham and bogus based on Mukesh Choksi's statement admitting to fraudulent activities. The assessee contended that he had no transactions with Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. or Alliance Intermediaries Network Pvt. Ltd. and provided evidence of transactions through Shilpa Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd. 2. Treatment of ?4,50,778/- as Income from Other Sources versus Unexplained Cash Credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act: The Assessing Officer was not convinced by the assessee's reply and treated the sale consideration of ?4,50,778/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition but modified the treatment to income from other sources, observing that the transactions were non-genuine and the appellant received accommodation entries of capital gain. The Commissioner noted discrepancies in the demat account entries and concluded that the transactions were fictitious, supported by the lack of genuine contract notes. 3. Validity of Reassessment Proceedings and Subsequent Annulment of the Assessment: The Tribunal observed that the assessee had provided all necessary details supporting the genuineness of the transactions, including contract notes, demat account statements, and bank statements. The Tribunal found that the assessee sold the shares through Shilpa Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd., not through Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. or Alliance Intermediaries Network Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee was not given an opportunity to cross-examine Mukesh Choksi, whose statement was the basis for reopening the assessment. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Andaman Timber Industries, the Tribunal emphasized the violation of natural justice due to the lack of cross-examination. 4. Deletion of the Addition of ?4,50,778/-: The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act, following the decision in the case of Pratik Suryakant Shah, where similar reassessment proceedings were quashed. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had proved the genuineness of the transactions, and the reassessment proceedings were not justified. Consequently, the addition of ?4,50,778/- was deleted. Conclusion: The appeal of the assessee was allowed, quashing the reassessment proceedings and deleting the addition of ?4,50,778/-. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing an opportunity for cross-examination and upheld the genuineness of the transactions based on the evidence provided by the assessee. The order was pronounced in the open court on 20th March 2017.
|
