Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (11) TMI 359 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:

1. Re-opening of assessments.
2. Disallowance of loss on selected trades.
3. Commission on impugned illiquid option trades.
4. Estimated commission on purchases from select parties treated as non-genuine transactions.
5. Estimated commission on all purchases and sales treating appellant as a non-entity.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Re-opening of Assessments:

The re-opening of assessments under section 147/148 was challenged by the assessees for various assessment years. The tribunal noted that the re-opening was primarily based on the 'Project Falcon' report, which alleged manipulative trading activities. However, the tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not conduct any independent investigation or inquiry to substantiate these claims. The tribunal emphasized that the AO's reliance solely on the report without any corroborative evidence was insufficient to justify the re-opening of assessments. Consequently, while the tribunal addressed the substantive issues on merits, the legal validity of re-opening was left open as all additions were deleted on merits.

2. Disallowance of Loss on Selected Trades:

The AO disallowed losses claimed by the assessees on certain trades, labeling them as non-genuine based on the 'Project Falcon' report. The tribunal observed that the AO selectively targeted trades where losses were reported, while ignoring similar trades where profits were declared. It was highlighted that the assessee conducted numerous trades in currency derivatives, and the AO failed to demonstrate why only specific loss-making trades were considered non-genuine. The tribunal concluded that the AO's approach was arbitrary and lacked a factual basis, leading to the deletion of the disallowance.

3. Commission on Impugned Illiquid Option Trades:

The AO estimated a commission at 2% (later reduced to 0.25% by the CIT(A)) on alleged non-genuine illiquid option trades. The tribunal found that this estimation was based on conjecture and lacked any supporting evidence. The tribunal noted that the AO did not provide any material to demonstrate that the assessee paid or received such commission. Furthermore, the tribunal emphasized that the AO's reliance on a statement from a third party (Shri Arun Shah) without allowing the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine was procedurally flawed. As a result, the tribunal deleted the additions related to commission on illiquid option trades.

4. Estimated Commission on Purchases from Select Parties Treated as Non-Genuine Transactions:

The AO made additions based on an estimated commission of 0.25% on purchases from certain parties deemed non-genuine. The tribunal found that the AO's conclusions were largely based on assumptions and an investigation report without independent verification. The tribunal noted that the assessees provided substantial documentary evidence, including purchase invoices, bank statements, and GST returns, to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions. The tribunal criticized the AO for not considering this evidence and relying solely on the investigation report. Consequently, the tribunal deleted the additions related to commission on non-genuine purchases.

5. Estimated Commission on All Purchases and Sales Treating Appellant as a Non-Entity:

In some cases, the AO treated the appellant as a non-entity, estimating a commission of 0.25% on all purchases and sales. The tribunal found that this approach was speculative and unsupported by evidence. The tribunal reiterated that the AO failed to conduct any independent inquiry or provide concrete evidence to substantiate the claim that the appellant earned commission on these transactions. The tribunal emphasized the need for a factual basis before making such additions and accordingly deleted the estimated commission on all purchases and sales.

Conclusion:

The tribunal allowed all appeals, deleting the additions made by the AO on the grounds of non-genuine trades and estimated commissions. The tribunal underscored the importance of evidence-based assessments and criticized the AO's reliance on assumptions and external reports without independent verification. The tribunal's decision highlights the necessity for tax authorities to substantiate their claims with concrete evidence and follow due process in assessment proceedings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates