9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 724X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of the assessee and contended that under similar facts and circumstances, additions so made was deleted by the Tribunal vide its order dated 30/09/2016. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and found from record that information was received by the AO that assessee being one of the beneficiaries of Mahasagar Securities Ltd. (now Alag Securities Pvt. Ltd.) group cases of share seam, from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai vide letter dated 26.03.2010. AO further observed that a Search and seizure action had revealed a seam wherein the said group of Mahasagar Securities Ltd. were found to be 'engaged in fraudulent billing activities and in the business of providing bogus speculation profit / loss, STCG / LTCG. Commodity trading (through MCS) and h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bserving as under:- 3. Rival contentions have been heard and perused the record. 4. Facts in brief are that information was received by the AO, assessee being one of the beneficiaries of Mahasagar Securities Ltd., (now Alag Securities Pvt. Ltd.,) group cases of share scam, from DDIT(Inv.), Mumbai vide letter dated 26/03/2010. Search and seizure action had revealed a scam wherein the said group of Mahasagar Securities Ltd. were found to be engaged in fraudulent billing activities and in the business of providing bogus speculation profit/loss, STCG/LTCG, commodity trading (through MCX) and having continuing this business for many years. In the said information supplied by the DDIT(Inv.) to the AO, the name of the assessee as one of the ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent activity was carried out. In response to question No.3 of his statement, Shri Mukesh Chokshi had described the modus operandi where the party first decides the amount of LTCG required by them following which the scrip was decided. The parties acquired the shares in DMAT Account out of their own fund and which then were sold in the open market. The group companies simply provided the bills of sale of purchase. 7. Under such facts and circumstances of the case, the AO arrived at that the total transaction of Rs. 1,14,93,377/- is to be treated as unexplained credit u/s. 69C under the head income from other sources and added the same to the total income of the assessee. Further the commission payable on such accommodation entries were est ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered on the very same day with regard to purchases as well as sales. The profit arising out of speculation transaction was already offered by the assessee for tax purposes which amounts to Rs. 4,07,148/- for purchase of shares which was sold in the subsequent year and profit thereon was also declared in the next year and also assessed by the AO under Section 143(3) amounting to Rs. 70,27,062/-. Our attention was also invited to the computation of total income filed alongwith return of income for the Assessment Year 2006-2007 wherein under the head income from other sources assessee has offered income of Rs. 70,27,062/- Our attention was also invited to the assessment framed by the AO u/s. 153A read with Section143(3) of the I.T. Act dated 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the head of income from other sources. 14. We also found that as per the assessment order framed for the assessment year 2006-2007 vide order dated 31/03/2015 passed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3), the AO has already brought to tax Rs. 70,27,062/- under the head income from other sources. Under these circumstances, when during the year under consideration, assessee has not made any payment on account of purchase of share nor received any payment on account of sale of shares, there does not arise any justification for making any addition under Section 69C by presuming that assessee has made payment for the purchases without disclosing its source. As per the remand report, all these transactions of purchases were speculati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, therefore, no addition was warranted u/s.69C of the Act. Under these facts and circumstances, the addition so made was deleted by the Tribunal. However, in the instant case before us, facts are not clear as to whether assessee has offered the income in the subsequent year so as to persuade us to follow the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of daughter of assessee in ITA No.662/Mum/2014 order dated 30/09/2016. We also found that assessment was framed u/s.144 since nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any return submission was filed inspite of AO having issued notice u/s.142(1) dated 19/09/2011, 05/10/2011 and 03/11/2011. However, in reply to the remand report, assessee has alleged that the AO has failed to provide details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
