9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of his income for income-tax purposes on a different basis on the ground that another basis may also be permissible under the method of accounting followed by the assessee or has been upheld in certain judgments of a High Court or Supreme Court. To this extent, the entries made in his books of account are as much binding as the method of accounting itself. It is only when the entries made in the books of account are erroneous or contrary to the correct legal position, the same are not conclusive or decisive of the matter, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971 (8) TMI 10 - SUPREME Court] and several other judgments. This position is also in built in the provisions of section 145(1) itself that where the method of accounting is followed is such that income cannot be properly deduced there from, the Assessing Officer may compute income upon such basis and in such manner as the Assessing Officer may determine. It cannot be said that the A.O. was not satisfied about the correctness of completeness of the accounts of the assessee. Because the assessee has disclosed gross receipt Rs.93,32,817/- whereas according to the A.O. gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash Credit - Additions u/s 68 - genuineness of purchase and sale of shares - held that:- The transactions carried out by the assessee have been explained through material on record and the assessee entered into the transactions of purchase and sale of shares genuinely. Sale consideration is received through broker who is also existing assessee with the Revenue Department. Therefore, there is no reason to treat the aforesaid transaction as non-genuine for the purpose of making addition. Since the source of the receipt of the amount in question is explained and the transaction entered into by the assessee with the broker clearly suggests a case of short-term capital gains, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) rightly directed the AO to compute the income as per return of income and for capital gains. - Decided in favor of assessee. - ITA No. 280/Agra/ 2011 - - - Dated:- 10-5-2013 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini And Shri A. L. Gehlot,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. D.R. For the Respondent : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate ORDER Per A. L. Gehlot,Accountant Member:- ITA No.280/Agra/2011 by the Revenue and C.O. No.55/Agra/2011 by the assessee have been filed against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s also confirmed by the broker in an enquiry instituted by the 'AO' under section 133(6) of the Act which fact has been wrongly disclosed in the assessment order. (b) BECAUSE, the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in holding that no evidence was filed establishing sale of shares and also establishing rates at which sales were, sold ignoring that credible and authentic evidences as were brought on records by the appellant proving aforesaid transaction which have been light heartedly ignored by the CIT(A). (c) BECAUSE, the CIT(A) was not justified in ignoring material evidences proving the transaction preferring to place reliance to the strict/rules of Indian Evidence Act without any notice to the appellant. (d) BECAUSE, the appellant has satisfactorily discharged the burden which lay upon it in proving the transaction, evidences brought on records remained uncontroversial and thus admitted against the respondent. (e) BECAUSE, the view of the authorities below is based on no evidence available or brought on records, except on consideration of presumption and surmises. (2)(a) BECAUSE, on due consideration of facts and in the circumstances of the case authorities below were highly u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s shown these receipts as income. 4. The CIT(A) deleted the addition in Para 5.2 of his order as under :- "5.2 I have considered the above submission of the Ld. AR and also perused the assessment order. The order of Hon'ble Tribunal dated 26.04.2007 produced before me in respect of the appellant for AY 2000-01 has also been examined and I find after considering the argument of Ld. AR that not only the method of accounting followed by the assessee is consistently and regularly being followed right from its inception but the facts remains that it is consistent with the method followed by other identical business. The Hon'ble Tribunal also considered that merely because on behalf of the assessee before the AO, the method has been wrongly named to be mercantile system by the Ld. AR, this fact by the itself alone is not sufficient material to disregard the fact that all along the assessee has been consistently following cash/receipt basis of the accounting with regard to rental income from the cold storage. The Hon'ble Tribunal held after considering these argument of the Ld. AR that on a careful consideration of the same, they were of the view that in these peculiar facts and circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ads as under:- "Ground no.1 (1) (a) That as per provisions of section 145 w.e.f. 01.04.1997, it is mandatory on the part of the assessee to follow either "cash" or Mercantile system of accounting. The A.O. was not correct in changing the system of accounting adopted by the assessee." 6. The learned D.R. submitted that the ITAT without considering the amendment and Section 145 has confirmed the order of the CIT(A). The learned D.R. submitted that in fact the ITAT has not given any finding in A.Y. 2000-01 about the method of accounting followed by the assessee. The learned D.R. submitted that in the year under consideration the assessee has neither followed cash nor mercantile system of accounting. The learned D.R. submitted that CIT(A) has wrongly allowed the ground of the assessee regarding the method of accounting followed by the assessee. The learned D.R. relied upon the order of the A.O. 7. The learned Authorized Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the order of CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee has followed mercantile system of accounting. The cold storage hire charges accrued to the assessee at the point when goods delivered to the farmers. The learned Aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... make the assessment in the manner provided in section 144. Section 145 is mandatory and the Revenue is bound by the assessee's choice of a method regularly employed unless by that method the true income, profits and gains cannot be arrived at. In other words, section 145 enacts that for the purpose of section 28 (profits and gains of business, profession or vocation) and section 56 (income from other sources), income, profit and gains must be computed in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. Therefore, if the assessee regularly employs a particular method of accounting and if no defects are found in the method or maintenance of accounts, the taxing authority is bound to compute the profits and gains of business or profession or vocation in accordance with the method employed by the assessee. Therefore, in case where the Income-tax Officer or the taxing authority finds that in maintaining accounts, the assessee has regularly employed a particular method and does not make any investigation to find or does not find any defect in the accounts and accept the accounts as they are, he is bound to compute the income in accordance with the accounts mai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer in exercise of his power under this provision is whether or not income can properly be deduced from the accounts maintained by the assessee, even if the accounts are correct and complete to the satisfaction of the officer and the income has been computed in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. What is to be determined by the officer in exercise of his power is a question of fact, i.e., whether or not income chargeable under the Act can properly be deduced from the books of account, and he must decide the question with reference to the relevant material and in accordance with the correct principles. In the words of Viscount Haldane, "it is plain that the question of what is or is not profit or gain must primarily be one of fact, and of fact to be ascertained by the tests applied in ordinary business" (Sun Insurance Office v. Clark 19121 AC 443, 455 (HL). Referring to section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which corresponds to section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, this court had stated in Chhabildas Tribhuvandas Shah v. CIT [1966]59 ITR 733, 731)" We may point out that we are not concerned with the correctness of the conclus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccountants of repute. The assessee's counsel places much reliance upon the decision of the House of Lords in Duple Motor Bodies Ltd. V. IRC [1961] 1 WLR 739 (HL). That was a case where the assessee carried on the business of building bodies for motor-coaches. At the end of each accounting period, the assessee had on hand a number of unfinished bodies. In computing the value of work-in- progress for income-tax purposes, the assessee adopted what is called the "direct cost" method, on the basis of which only the direct cost of raw materials and labour expended on the work was taken into account. The Revenue sought to value the work-in-progress on an "on-cost" basis. The direct cost method, as adopted by the assessee in that case, takes into account monies spent solely for the purpose of the manufacture of the particular goods, whilst the on-cost method treats, as an additional item of cost, proportions of various items of expenditure incurred in con- nection with the manufacture of those goods as well as of other goods. The two principal elements in "direct cost", as adopted by the assessee in that case, are labour and raw materials and that method is far more accurate in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, so far as applicable, and in conformity with the rules of the Income-tax Act, or of that Act as modified by the provisions and schedules of the Acts regulating excess profits duty, as the case may be. For example, the ordinary principles of com- mercial accounting require that in the profit and loss account of a merchant's or manufacturer's business the values of the stock-in-trade at the beginning and at the end of the period covered by the account should be entered at cost or market price, whichever is the lower, although there is nothing about this in the taxing statutes . . ." Where the market value has fallen before the date of valuation and, on that date, the market value of the article is less than its actual cost, the assessee is entitled to value the articles at market value and thus anticipate the loss which he will probably incur at the time of the sale of the goods. Valuation of the stock-in-trade at cost or market value, whichever is the lower, is a matter entirely within the discretion of the assessee. But whichever method he adopts, it should disclose a true picture of his profits and gains. If, on the other hand, he adopts a system which does not disclose the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he system adopted, by the assessee was likely to produce stock valuations which were seriously and substantially incorrect, thereby causing distortion of the assessment of the profits and gains for the year. It is not only the right but the duty of the Assessing Officer to consider whether or not the books disclose the true state of accounts and the correct income can be deduced there from. It is incorrect to say, as contended on behalf of the assessee, that the officer is bound to accept the system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee the correctness of which had not been questioned in the past. There is no estoppel in these matters and the officer is not bound by the method followed in the earlier years. In CIT v. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. [1938] 6 ITR 36 (PC), Lord Thankerton stated that section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, related to a method of accounting regularly employed by the asses- see. The section, postulated that such a method of accounting was the necessary basis of computation, unless, in the opinion of the Income-tax Officer, the income, profits and gains could not properly be deduced from such method. But it could very well be that, "th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot to do it: it would be utterly impossible accurately to assess profits and gains merely on a statement of receipts and payments or on the basis of turnover. It has long been recognised that the right method of assessing profits and gains is to take into account the value of the stock-in-trade at the beginning and the value of the stock-in-trade at the end as two of the items in the computation. I need not cite authority for the general proposition, which is admit- ted at the Bar, that for the purposes of ascertaining profits and gains the ordinary principles of commercial accounting should be applied, so long as they do not conflict with any express provision of the relevant statutes." Referring to those observations, Shah J., as he then was, in CIT v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 122, 132 (SC) says: "We have already, said that in England there is no provision which compels the tax officer to adopt in the computation of income the system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. But whatever may be the system, whether it is cash or mercantile, as observed by Croom-Johnson J. in a trading venture it would be impossible accurately to assess the true profits with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he value of the stock one has at the beginning of, and at the end of, the accounting year. (2) The figures for stock are just as important as any other figures. Values may have to be estimated when market price is taken, but any departure from accuracy is reflected in the trading account (3) Stock should be taken either at cost price or at market price, which- ever is the lower......" Lord Herschell in Russell v. Town and County Bank Ltd. [1888] 13 AC 418, 424 ; 4 TLR, 500 (HL) observes:- "The profit of a trade or business is the surplus by which the receipts from the trade or business exceed the expenditure necessary for the purpose of earning those receipts . . ."What is the profit of a trade or business is a question of fact and it must be ascertained, as all facts must be ascertained, with reference to the relevant evidence, and not on doctrines or theories : "no assumption need be made unless the facts cannot be ascertained, and then only to the extent to which they cannot be ascertained. There is no room for theories as to flow of costs . Minister of National Revenue v. Anaconda American Brass Ltd. [1956] AC 85 ; [1956] 30 ITR 84,99 (PC). Section 145 of the Income-tax Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act that the amounts in question have been correctly treated as capital expenditure in the books of account maintained and annual accounts published by the assessee-company. The court observed that the question goes to the root of the income-tax assessment proceedings. As per section 4 which is the charging section levy of income-tax has been envisaged as an annual tax "in respect of the total income of the previous year of every person". "Total income" has been defined under section 2(45) to mean the amount of income computed in the manner laid down in the Act. Section 145 lays down the manner of computation of income chargeable under the heads "Profits and gains of business or profession" and "Income from other sources" to be in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. The only exception to this general principle is the cases where the method employed is such that the income cannot properly be deduced there from or where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or the completeness of the accounts of the assessee. There are any number of Court pronouncements where it has been held that provisions of section 145 are mandatory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y stated at page 530, "once, therefore, the method of accounting employed by the assessee has been regularly employed and income, profits and gains can properly be deduced from such regularly employed method of accounting, that is the end of the matter for the purpose of proviso to sub-section (1) of section 145." 10.6 Significantly, the provision of section 145(1) presupposes that there can be more than one method of accounting the income from which may be properly deducible. These provisions would make no sense if always there is one method of accounting the income from which alone may be properly deducible. In the case of on-going business, the profit or loss made by the businessman from that business, as aptly described in the case of Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 509/23 Taxman 14W (SC) at page 521 remains in the "Womb of future". The measurement of periodic income is, to that extent, a matter of estimation on the basis of certain acceptable principle of accounting. For this reason, on the same facts and circumstances, the computation of business income may differ depending upon the method of accounting employed. In other words, it is not the legal position that o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bai [1945] 13 ITR 224 and Madras High Court in the case of Bangalore Woollen Cotton Silk Mills Co. Ltd. [1950] 18 ITR 423, though the question before them was as to whether an assessee writing books of account under mercantile system of accounting can ask for cash system for the purpose of his income-tax assessment. This issue has recently been categorically determined in the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. UCO Bank [1993] 200 ITR 68. In that case UCO Bank after having followed a particular method of valuation of shares and securities in his books of account insisted upon valuation of the same in the Income-tax return under the method "cost or market price, whichever is lower". The basis on which these assets were valued in the books of account and another basis which was followed in the return of income were both consistent with the mercantile system of accounting. In fact in the case of Chainrup Sampatram v. CIT [1953] 24 ITR 481 (SC) the later method has been upheld and that decision was heavily relied upon by the UCO Bank's case before Calcutta High Court. After consideration of the matter, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court held : "The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the correct legal position. 12. In the light of law laid down by the Apex court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 0044[SC], before coming to the facts of the case, we would like to examine what is "mercantile method of accounting" The mercantile system of accounting is well-known and this method has been explained in a judgment of this court in Keshav Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 23 ITR 230 (SC) :- "That system brings into credit what is due, immediately it becomes legally due and before it is actually received and it brings into debit expenditure the amount for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed." 13. Simon in his Income Tax, second edition, volume II, at page 204, under the caption "Accrued liability" observes as under:- "In cases, however, where an actual liability exists, as is the case with accrued expenses, a deduction is allowable ; and this is not affected by the fact that the amount of the liability and the deduction will subsequently have to be varied. A liability, the amount of which is deductible for income-tax purposes, is one which is actually existing at t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 090/- while finally computing the total income as evident from following computation of the A.O. which is reproduced from A.O. order, Page Nos. 12 13 as under :- "1. Net profit as pr P L A/c 9,50,571/- 2. Short Term capital gain 39,94,438/- + 1,62,000/- 41,56,438/- Less: brought forward Short term Capital loss for A.Y. 2002-03 2,45,438/- (Short term capital loss of Rs.25,93,455/- not allowed 39,11,000/- 3 undisclosed profit from trading of potato As discussed above 12,74,589/- 4.Expenses disallowed as discussed above 9,50,000/- 70,86,160/- 17. On the basis of above discussion, without considering the aspect whether assessee has followed correct method of accounting in accordance with Section 145 of the Act or not but certainly the addition proposed by the A.O. is not sustainable in law and fact. In the light of the fact, the order of the CIT(A) is confirmed. 18. The second ground is in respect of restricting the disallowance to Rs.1,70,764/- made by the A.O. During the assessment proceedings the A.O. noticed that during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o maintained to show incurring of these expenses and hence because of not being supported completely by bills, during the course of discussion in appeal, the Ld. AR and the director of the company agreed for 5% disallowance out of these expenses. For loading and unloading and paltai, only self made vouchers but all are not signed by the recipients. It has been argued by the director of the company that such expenses are essential in this type of business. However, due to defect in vouchers, he agreed that 10% of such expenses could be disallowed. In view of these facts and circumstances, I hold that 5% of expenses out of machinery repair and maintenance would be disallowed and 10% of loading and unloading and labour paltai is to be disallowed. Since for diesel and fuel expenses, all the bills were found, no disallowance is called for out of these expenses. Therefore, the AO is directed to making following disallowances as against the total disallowances of Rs.9,50,000/- made by him in the assessment order :- Nature of expenses Total amount claimed by the appellant (Rs.) Amount disallowed by the AO (Rs.) Amount sustained in appeal (Rs.) Loading ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vi Ice Cold Storage (supra). I find from the discussion in the assessment order as well as from the assessment record that the AO has only brought out one evidence to support its contention that the appellant is selling potatoes, by observing that drafts received by the appellant on sale of potatoes are under the name of the appellant company and the same were deposited in its bank account. However, no other documentary evidence or any other evidence in form of information coillected from farmers or from the persons to whom potatoes were sold were collected to establish that the appellant was purchasing potatoes from farmers and then selling them in the market. On the basis of the draft deposited in the bank account, the AO has just presumed that the appellant was purchasing potatoes from the farmers at the time of storage or just after storage or at the time of nikasi of potatoes. In order to prove the purchase of potatoes from the farmers, the AO has not made any efforts to collect any evidence from the farmer whether they sold potatoes to the appellant or not. What is available in the record as per the books of account maintained by the appellant company is that the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te arbitrary because the same AO has not made any addition in the year 2001-02 and 2002-03 and in subsequent AY 04-05 on account of trading of potatoes. When in the assessment year 03-04, the AO who passed this order has given finding that the appellant company is doing trading of potatoes then why the addition on account of trading of potatoes was not made in AY 04-05 is not clear. Therefore, I find the addition made by the AO only in one assessment year on account of trading of potatoes i.e. year under appeal (AY 2003-04) is quite arbitrary". "8.6 I have also gone through the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Agra in the case of Ravi Ice and Storage (Supra) referred by Ld. AR. In this order, the Hon'ble Tribunal has accepted the business practice on sale of potatoes on behalf of the farmers as referred by Ld. AR. In this order, it is observed by the Hon'ble ITAT that "in case entire potatoes belonged to assessee, the Ld. AO was required to make addition on account of unexplained investment and thereafter he should have estimated profit thereon but he has restrained himself from doing the same ostensibly because he was convinced that these potatoes really belonged to others and not to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at A.O. has only brought out one evidence which supports his case that the assessee was selling potatoes by observing that draft received by the assessee on sale of potatoes are in the name of the assessee's company and same was deposited in its Bank account. The CIT(A) further noticed that no other documentary evidence or any other evidence in the form of information was collected from farmers or from the person to whom potatoes were sold to establish that the assessee was purchasing from farmers and selling them in the market. The CIT(A) further noticed that the A.O. made addition on presumption basis without any sufficient evidences. The CIT noted that the addition in this particular year was found arbitrary because the same A.O. did not make any addition in A.Y. 2001-02, and 2002-03 and subsequent year 2004-05, in spite of the fact that the same practice has been followed by the assessee before deleting the addition. The CIT(A) also considered one decision of the Agra Bench in the case of Ravi Ice and Cold Storage Ltd. (Supra) and observed that the ITAT has accepted the nature of transaction that this is clearly business practice of cold storage selling potatoes on behalf of fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhital Das Modi (supra) and ITAT Allahabad in cse of Allawalpur Cold Storage Ice Industry (supra). Considering these facts and circumstances of the cse and taking into account the judicial pronouncements as referred by Ld. AR, I find that decision of the AO holding the advance of Rs.16,10,690/- from farmers as unexplained cash credit is not justified and hence liable to be deleted. However, since no addition has been made by the AO in the assessment order on account of this evidence because it has been presumed by him that assessee has shown this advance out of surplus profit of Rs.12,74,589/- earned from undisclosed trading of potatoes, appellant cannot get any relief from assessed income because of deletion of addition of Rs.16,10,690/- on account of unexplained cash credit. Accordingly, ground no.7 is allowed but no relief out of assessed income." 24. We have heard learned representatives of the parties and records perused. The important facts of this issue are that the A.O. did not make separate addition of this amount of Rs.16,10,690/-. The A.O. presumed that the assessee has shown this amount out of surplus profit of Rs.12,74,589/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... incurred unexplained expenses @ 2% amounting to Rs.10662/-. Hence, the amount of Rs.5,43,742/- (5,33,120 + 10,662) was also treated as income of assessee from undisclosed sources, but no separate addition thereof was made on the presumption that the assessee would have invested this amount out of inflated expenses of Rs.9,50,000/- for which separate addition had already been made by AO. 26. While assailing the assessment order before the ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished substantial evidences in the shape of contract notes and bills raised by the brokers against purchase and sale of shares and in response to the notice u/s. 133(6) the broker, M/s. Aayushi Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. furnished a detailed reply, copy endorsed to assessee, giving complete details of shares, however, the AO has not mentioned these facts in the assessment order. It was further submitted that the assessee transferred the share certificates in physical form through the share broker Motley Securities Ltd. by signing the deed of transfer and giving delivery thereof in original to the share broker. Therefore, the shares stood ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inflated expenses. The ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the said amount being credited in the books of assessee, should be separately added u/s. 68 and therefore, he reduced the addition on account of inflated expenses from Rs.9,50,000/- to Rs.1,70,764/- He also directed the AO to make separate addition of expenses of Rs.10,662/- as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the IT Act. The assessee by means of various grounds has assailed the impugned order in his cross-objection. 28. Reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that substantial evidences were furnished before the authorities below to prove the genuineness of purchase and sale of shares, which have not been considered by them in right perspective. It was submitted that the company whose shares were transacted and the brokers through whom the purchase and sale transactions took place were genuine and no evidence is brought on record to belie the genuineness of the share transactions. It is also contended that ITAT, Agra Bench in several decisions has decided the identical issue in similar facts and circumstances in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orded in para nos.5 6 of the order : "5. We have considered the rival submissions and the material on record and do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition. The AO, on the facts of the case found that similar issue have been considered in the case of HUF of assessee and other family members Shri Rajesh Kumar Garg and Smt. Seema Garg who have also shown long-term capital gains of the similar nature of the same broker and of the same scrip in the assessment year under appeal, which were found to be bogus by the AO and additions have been confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) as well. However, the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed copy of the Tribunal order in their cases dated 31.03.2009 in which the ITAT, Agra Bench deleted the similar additions and no reliance was placed on the statement of Shri Mukesh Gupta and his wife. The order of the Tribunal has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court vide order dated 15.02.2011. In the aforesaid decision, it was found that those assessees had obtained shares in preferential allotment directly from the companies and the purchases declared in the balance sheet of earlier years, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
