9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.2013 for A.Y. 2004-05. 2. The assessee in the present appeal apart from challenging the validity or otherwise of reassessment proceedings has also challenged the addition of Rs. 1,45,125/- , which according to the department represents sale and purchase of share which are bogus in nature. To be precise, according to the department the assessee has obtained accommodation entries amounting to Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en none appeared on behalf of the assessee the case was adjourned to 27.11.2014 and the bench clerk was directed to inform the AR of the assessee on phone. Accordingly, the information was given to the learned AR of the assessee, who did not represent on 27.11.2014. Accordingly, I proceed to decide the appeal exparte qua the assessee. 4. The learned DR relied upon the orders passed by the AO and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onus by filing complete details ie. purchase of shares, share certificate, Demat account, confirmation from Buniyad Chemicals Limited of whose shares were purchased. Consideration was paid through account payee cheque, therefore, there is no material against the assessee from which it can be said that the transaction entered by the assessee was not genuine. It is further noticed that in case of Ka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he garb of bogus purchases as there is no evidence against the assessee. Keeping in mind all these facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that the addition made and sustained on account of purchase of shares only on the basis of statement of Mukesh Chokshi, was not justified. Therefore, the same is deleted." 5. In this view of the situation, respectfully following the aforementioned order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
