9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 2008-09, claiming following substantial questions of law : "A. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in rejecting the application for additional evidence under given facts and circumstances of the case in not admitting the additional evidences there being reasonable cause for not filing the same before the authorities below by clearly defying well settled law that where the documents have bearing on the case, the same need to be taken into consideration by the competent authorities as was held in the case of Tek Ram v. CIT [2013] 357 ITR 133 (SC) ; 93 DTR 350 (SC) wherein it was held that 'Fresh documents placed before it for the first time which are of some relevance are required to be looked int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled his return of income for the assessment year 2008-09. Notice was issued to the appellant to explain certain points. The Assessing Officer asked the appellant to explain the deposit of amounts in account books from various customers for whom he was doing trading in commodities amounting to Rs. 30,40,620. The appellant replied that the same were receipts from his customers for whom he was doing trading of commodities as per past and future practice. The Assessing Officer deputed his Inspector to verify the claim from only four persons as a test check. After examining the matter, the Assessing Officer treated the entire set of receipts from all the 27 persons claimed as unexplained cash credits/unexplained investments under sections 68/69 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of additional evidence is trying to produce the copy of the ledger account and permanent account numbers of various people and in some cases bank pass books without producing any confirmation from those persons from whom allegedly he had received the amounts. Further the Tribunal had noticed that the assessee under the garb of additional evidence was making half-hearted effort to gain a remand so that he can fabricate some story before the Assessing Officer. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal on this issue read thus : "10. We have considered the rival submissions carefully and find no force in the submissions of learned counsel for the assessee. The father of the assessee died on February 23, 2010 whereas the assessment proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s simply stated that may be these persons have shifted but no plausible explanation was given. The other two persons, i.e., Shri Chaman Lal and Shri Manoj Kumar straightaway refused that they have undertaken any transaction with the assessee and even during the cross examination the assessee's counsel could not explain the statement or filed any evidence to show that they have undertaken any transaction with the assessee. This fact clearly shows that the assessee is trying to build a story as an afterthought. We further find that the evidence which is sought to be filed now as additional evidence consists of copy of the ledger account and permanent account numbers of various people and in some cases the bank pass book is also there. But ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had claimed income under the head capital gains as short-term capital gains as well as long-term capital gains on some other transactions of dealing in shares. Perusal of the balance- sheet revealed that the shares were shown as stock-in-trade and not as investment. Therefore, the transactions in shares were held to be in the nature of business activity and the income was assessed as income from business and profession. The finding of the Assessing Officer was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Tribunal after examining the matter recorded that once the shares had been shown in stock in trade by the assessee itself, it could not be said that the assessee had made investment in such shares and thus these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then again purchased on March 12, 2008 and sold on March 13, 2008. This itself shows that assessee was a trader. Further the assessee has dealt in large number of shares total ling to 64 scripts in various transactions during the year. The Assessing Officer has also noted that total number of shares purchased during the year were 11,12,741 for a sum of Rs. 1,87,76,103 and sold 11,12,741 shares for a sum of Rs. 1,94,69,637. In any case the Assessing Officer has rightly noted that shares have been shown as stock- in-trade in the balance-sheet and not as investment. Once the shares have been shown in stock in trade by the assessee itself then it cannot be said that the assessee had made investment in such shares therefore in our opinion the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
