9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta Kumar vs. ITO (2017 (5) TMI 1111 - ITAT HYDERABAD) allowed a similar contention of the other assessee's, mainly on the ground that neither the statement of Mr. Mukhesh Choksi was provided to the assessee nor the cross-examination was allowed and it was not even placed on record. Considering the similarity of facts and circumstances and binding nature of decision of the ITAT, the action of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the head income from capital gains as against under the head income from other sources as assessed by the Assessing Officer treating the same as income from undisclosed sources. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the facts that the demat account of the assessee has not shown the transactions of the alleged purchases and no Security Transaction Tax was paid on these purchases. Fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -. 4. A.O. was of the opinion that capital gains declared by the assessee was bogus. In this regard, A.O. also observed that he received information from the office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai that M/s. Alliance Intermediaries and Network Pvt Ltd., one of the group companies of Mr. Mukesh Choksi, and also other companies of this group have provided accommodation entries to vario ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statement of Mr. Mukhesh Choksi was provided to the assessee nor the cross-examination was allowed and it was not even placed on record. Considering the similarity of facts and circumstances and binding nature of decision of the ITAT, the action of the A.O. in treating the LTCG and STCG as income from other sources was held to be not warranted. 6. Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
