9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri, ld. counsel for the assessee and Shri Vivek Batra, ld. DR. The crux of arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee is that the assessee was operating only on behalf of PMS constituent, therefore, any amount received on behalf of the said constituent cannot be treated as income of the assessee and further the commission so earned from PMS constituent was offered as income, therefore, there is no question of offering any further income. On the other hand, the ld. DR, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order by contending that right from assessment stage, the assessee did not produce any evidence in support of its claim. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as in the impugned order that even after set-aside proceedings, the assessee did not produce any evidence in support of its contention that the transaction and subscription was on account of PMS client account, thus, the addition was again made. Even, the submission of the assessee vide letter dated 23/06/2011 (available at page-4 & 5 of the impugned order) were considered and before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also no such evidence was produced. Even before us, no evidence was produced by the assessee, therefore, we have no option but to confirm the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), consequently, the stand of the ld. First Appellate Authority, on the issue in hand, is affirmed. 3. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find out whether the investment in securities is in the nature of investment are stock in trade. We are reproducing hereunder the relevant finding recorded by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals):- "I have considered the facts of the case and submissions of the assessee. Hon'ble ITAT set aside the issue to the A.O. against the initial assessment order with a direction that the A.O. to find out whether the investment in securities is in the nature of investment or stock-in-trade. Whereas assessee could produce no other evidence before the A.O. to prove that it is stock-in-trade except that it is claimed that the profit on such transactions on sale of the securities is offered as business profit year after year and also produced a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order. 4.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that, as per Revenue, the assessee did not accounted for the interest on overdue rentals on accrual basis. The stand of the assessee is that there was no agreement for waiving of penal interest with the parties and the same are considered from case to case basis. It was also pleaded by the ld. counsel for the assessee that in subsequent years, the penal interest was accounted for whenever receive. On earlier occasion, the matter was remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction that the assessee shall produce the basis for waiving of such interest. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
