9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the submission of the assessee without going on the detailed facts mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the assessment . 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of ₹ 54,100/- by ignoring the facts that assessee himself submitted in letter dated 26.6.2007 that he earned profit from M/s Shambu Daya Vinod Kumar. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts, the order of ld CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and that of Assessing Officer be restored. 3. Regarding ground No.1, brief facts of the case are that It is noted by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has declared long tyerm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsferred to Demat A/c of the assessee in Demat A/c No.220554406. It was also submitted that the shares were purchased through broker M/s Elbee Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. and since these shares were directly received in Demat A/c of the assessee, distinctive Nos. of the shares cannot be given. It was also submitted that payment against purchase of these shares were made by DD 16000 dated 23.2.2004. It was also submitted that the assessee has purchased these shares through share broker. Further these shares are listed at a recognized stock exchange. Regarding sale of share, it was submitted that these shares were sold through share broker M/s DN Kansal Securities Pvt. Ltd. @ ₹ 107/- per share and the sale consideration was received vide DD/Che ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Ram Nath has been shown in the computation of ₹ 49,100/- but profit earned through M/s Shambu Dayal Vinod Kumar ₹ 54,100/- meaning thereby that the assessee has earned profit of ₹ 54,100/- through M/sShambu Dayal Vinod Kumar in addition to earning of profit of ₹ 49,100/- through M/s Shambu Dayal Vinod Kumar. Being aggrieved, the assesee carried the matter in appeal before Ld CIT(A). Both these matters in appeal before Ld CIT(A) who has deleted both these additions and now the revenue is in appeal before us. 4. Ld DR of the revenue supported the assessment order. Our attention was drawn to page No.24 of the paper book which contain the Demat A/c, statement of the assessee and Demat A/c No.2004455406. It is pointe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the shares sold by the assessee in February, 2005 at ₹ 107/- per share and delivered in March 2005 but the same shares which are said to be acquired by the assessee in November, 2003, Ld AR of the assessee could not show us any evidence that these shares were credited to Demat A/c of the assessee in . February, 2004/March, 2004 after making payment by the assessee on 23.2.2004. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and have gone through the material available on record. We find that as per the claim of the assessee, these 11000 shares of M/s Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. were acquired by the assessee at a cost of ₹ 55,594/- in the month of February, 2003 and the payment for the same was made by DD on 23.2.2004. Hence, it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee could not establish that these 11000 shares of this company credited to the Demat A/c of the assessee in November, 2004 but the same shares which were said to be purchased by the assessee in the month of November, 2003 and payment of which is said to be made by the assessee in February, 2004. In the absence of this source of shares credited to the Demat A/c of the assessee in November, 2004 remains unexplained and hence sale proceed of these shares has to be treated as unexplained income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer has done the same whereas Ld CIT(A) has deleted the addition on the basis that the theory of the preponderance of the probability when the assessee do not file any cogent evidence and the Assessing Officer has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 28.11.2004 which was encashed by the Bank by that party on 3.1.2005 and hence the income was only of ₹ 49,100/- although ₹ 54,100/- was receivable from that party including the advance amount of ₹ 5,000/- given by the assessee. Ld CIT(A) has deleted this addition by observing that the Assessing Officer has not been able to controvert the explanation furnished by the assessee to the effect that the assessee has neither dealing with M/s Shambu Dayal Ram Nath during the year nor has pair or received any amount from that party.Copy of A/c of M/s Shambu Dayal Ram Nath is available before us on pages 26-27 of the paper book. As per the same, there is income of only ₹ 49,100/-. As per copybof account that party availab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
