9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n but was shown as long term capital gain by the assessee. Such a mistake cannot be construed as a concealment of income u/s 271(1)(c). Therefore, in view of above, as well as relief given by co-ordinate Bench to the assessee in assessee’s own case for AY 2004-05 against the order of AO u/s 143(3), we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A). We uphold the same. - Decided against revenue - ITA No.2730/Ahd/2011 - - - Dated:- 9-10-2015 - Shri S. S. Godara, JM, Manish Borad, AM. For The Appellant : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. DR For The Respondent : Shri Rasesh Shah, AR ORDER PER Manish Borad, Accountant Member. This appeal of the Revenue is filed against the order of CIT(A)- II, Surat, dated 23rd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iii. Low household withdrawals Rs.50,000/- iv. Unexplained cash credits in form of sale of shares Rs.10,01,420/- Total Rs.11,39,420/- The AO was satisfied that as assessee has clearly committed default under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, passed penalty order under section 271(1)(c) in respect of addition of ₹ 11,39,420/- as mentioned above and imposed minimum penalty @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded which worked out at ₹ 3,41,826/-. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before CIT(A) who quashed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en in regard to the above referred four additions :- (i) In regard to unaccounted sale of stock - 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee has not explained or submitted the details of the sale of closing stock. He has just made a submission without substantiated the same. In view of these facts, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the AO. Thus, this ground of assessee is dismissed. (ii) In regard to unexplained cash deposited in bank 15. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee has not substantiated the source of deposits either before the AO or before the CIT(A) and also not before us. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chase of shares in which the assessee had dealt was executed from the on line system of exchange. It is also a fact that A.O. had issued summons u/s 131 to M/s Bubna Stock Broking Services Ltd. Pramodkukar Kothari but the same were not responded by the respective parties. The assessee also could not contradict the findings of AO CIT(A) by bringing any tangible material on record. The case law relied by assessee are distinguishable on facts. The assessee in its paper book has submitted the copy of the bank account of the brokers to whom the shares were sold and has also stated to have received the sale proceeds by account payee cheques. However, the purchase of shares from M/s Bubna Stock Broking Services Ltd. has not been proved by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
