9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccounted income has been set aside. We see no reason to disturb the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the first and second appellate authorities Sale of shares through IPOs - Tribunal held as cannot be said that frequency of transactions in shares of the assessee was very high - no repetitive transactions were entered into by the assessee and entire investment in shares was made by the assessee out of her own funds - Held that:- Though the Appellate Tribunal has referred to the fact that similar treatment given by the assessee in the books of accounts for the earlier years was accepted by the Assessing Officer, that is not the only ground on which the finding is rendered by the Appellate Tribunal. It is true that paragraph3.3 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the financial year 2007-08. The Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that as payment for purchase of shares was made in the month of December 2007, all purchases of 14,000 shares by the respondentassessee will have to be treated as purchases in December 2007. According to the Assessing Officer, price of shares of the company in the month of May 2007 was lower and, in fact, shares were purchased in December 2007 at the prevailing high price by showing that the same were purchased in May 2007 at lower price. The difference in the price of shares between December 2007 and May 2007 was worked out by the Assessing Officer at ₹ 84,24,629/. This was treated as payment made by the respondent-assessee for acquiring shares and was tre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ange, in the month of May 2007 the brokers purchased the shares in their name and transferred it to the assessee's demat account in the month of December 2007. As regards second issue, he urged that the transactions effected in particular year will have to be tested separately and there cannot be hard and fast rule on this aspect. He invited our attention to the findings of fact recorded by the authorities below. He pointed out that the frequency of transactions in shares by the respondent-assessee was very high. He urged that even after recording the said finding the Appellate Tribunal accepted the case made out by the respondent-assessee. He would, therefore, submit that substantial questions of law as framed arise in this appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) while deciding appeal. His order has been confirmed by the Appellate Tribunal. The result of the finding is that the direction to treat the price difference between December 2007 and May 2007 as unaccounted income has been set aside. We see no reason to disturb the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the first and second appellate authorities. Hence, no substantial question of law arises as regards this finding. 7. Now coming to the second question/ground canvassed before the Appellate Tribunal, as a matter of fact, it was found that the respondent-assessee had made transactions in 24 scrips out of which 12 were allotted through IPOs. Therefore, it was held that it cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
