9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me from Other Sources". 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Honorable CIT(A)-l Nasik, while directing the Assessing Officer to treat the income of Rs. 65,51,352/- as Business Income, ignored the fact that assessee has not established with documentary evidence that the transactions of purchase and sale of the equity shares are genuine. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Honorable CIT(A)-l, Nasik failed to appreciate the fact that the Bombay Stock Exchange has confirmed that no transactions, as mentioned in the Contract Notes, have been executed on the Stock Exchange and that assessee is not a registered client of the Share Broker. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Honorable CIT(A)-l, Nasik, while granting relief to assessee, erred in relying on decisions, facts of which are different from that of assessee. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Honorable CIT(A)-l failed to appreciate the fact that even during the appellate proceeding assessee has not filed/produced any evidence to counter the finding of the Assessing Officer that the share transactions are not genuine. 6. On the facts and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee in the submissions dated 19.07.2011 had stated that trading in shares was done through M/s. Mahesh Kothari Share & Stock Brokers (Pvt.) Ltd. The assessee furnished the ledger account of the said share broker, but did not filed the details regarding demat account before the Assessing Officer. In order to verify the genuineness of the transactions, the assessee was asked to furnish the detailed address of the share broker from whom the transactions were executed and also to provide the copies of sale and contract notes and furnish the details of demat account and also inform how the delivery of shares were taken. On 24.10.2011, the assessee furnished the copies of contract notes but failed to furnish any other details. The Assessing Officer made certain enquiries and it was confronted to the assessee that the said share broker was not operating from the address provided by the assessee and it was also informed to the assessee that the share broker was not active as per information available with Bombay Stock Exchange. Further, the Stock Exchange vide letter dated 05.12.2011 informed that the assessee was not a registered client of M/s. Mahesh Kothari Share & Stock Brokers (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very of any shares though the transaction are stated to have been executed from 1/10/08. The persons involved in tax planning of the assessee were well aware that the fictitious income shown is in fact not income under the head short-term capital gains as there is no delivery of shares." 8. In view thereof, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee had introduced its unaccounted / undisclosed income to the tune of Rs. 65,51,352/- in the guise of short term capital gains on sale of shares and the same was taxed under the head 'income from other sources'. 9. Before the CIT(A), the plea of the assessee was that the broker was a company which was duly registered under the Companies Act and also registered with Bombay Stock Exchange and the allegations of the Assessing Officer were without any evidence. It was further stated by the assessee before the CIT(A) that the transactions were supported with detailed contract notes and the amounts were received through banking channels and there was no justification in treating the share transactions as non-genuine. The CIT(A) noted the alternate plea of the assessee made before the Assessing Officer as to why the said income should not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tract Notes were unsigned. A written submission was filed on 8/12/11, wherein inter aha, it was mentioned that they have called for the required information from broker, but till that date it is not received, as soon as it is received the same will be submitted. Meanwhile copies of the Contract Notes were forwarded to the Bombay Stock Exchange to verify the genuineness of the transactions mentioned in the Contract Notes. The Stock Exchange under its letter dated 5/12/11 informed that assessee is not a registered client of Mahesh Kothari Shares and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (Copy of the said letter is annexed to the SOF as Exhibit "C"). Copy of the letter of BSE was provided to assessee, vide this office letter dated 12/12/11, and given opportunity to produce evidence to prove that the share transactions are genuine. Vide letter dated 26/12/1 assessee stated that they have already submitted the information available with them. Required information is called from the broker but till date it is not made available by the broker. As soon as information and required documents will be available from them it will be submitted. The Bombay Stock Exchange vide letter dated 30/12/11, re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see as income from other sources. In the absence of assessee having furnished the details of said shares and establishing the factum of transfer of shares, we reverse the order of CIT(A) and uphold the order of Assessing Officer. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are allowed. 15. The assessee in Cross Objection is aggrieved by the addition of Rs. 25 lakhs which was claimed as revenue expenditure by the assessee. 16. The facts relating to the issue are that the assessee claimed to have entered into an agreement on 07.12.2005 for acquiring rights in the land and had paid sum of Rs. 25 lakhs to Parsharampuria Industries Ltd. The total consideration of the said land was fixed at Rs. 1,07,60,000/-. Since the assessee could not manage to procure the funds within prescribed time mentioned in the agreement, hence, as per clauses of the agreement, the said amount was forfeited and the assessee claimed the same as bad debts. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee observing as under:- "5. The above submission of the assessee is given due consideration. On going through the deed dated 7/12/2005 executed by assessee with Parshurampuria Industries Ltd, it is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
