9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the High Court , (f) copy of allotment of shares on merger, (g) evidence of sale of shares through the stock exchange, (h) copy of demat statement showing the sale of shares, (i) copy of bank statement reflecting sale receipts, (j) copy of brokers ledger, (k) copy of Contract Notes etc. - Delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, on account of Long Term Capital Gains. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 1758/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 23-1-2019 - Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT DR ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY :- This appeal is filed by the assessee and is directed against the order of the ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as general in nature and not specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given. 4. The ld. D/R, submitted that the transaction was not genuine. He argued that the entire capital gain was stage managed by a few operators and investors. He relied on the order of ld. Assessing Officer and argued that the same be upheld. He relied on the order of the Chennai A Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Pankaj Agarwal Sons (HUF) vs. ITO in ITA No. 1413 to 1420/CHNY/2018; order dt. 06/12/2018, for the propos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No.569/Kol/2017 Gautam Pincha 15.11.2017 6 ITA No.443/KOl/2017 Kiran Kothari HUF 15.11.2017 7 ITA No.2281/Kol/2017 Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO 20.07.2018 8 ITA No.456 of 2007 Bombay High Court CIT vs. Shri Mukesh Ratilal Marolia 07.09.2011 9 ITA No.95 of 2017 (O M) PCIT vs. Prem Pal Gandhi 18.01.2018 6. Regarding the case laws relied upon by the ld. Departmental Representative, I find that, in the case of M/s. Pankaj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sale of shares, (i) copy of bank statement reflecting sale receipts, (j) copy of brokers ledger, (k) copy of Contract Notes etc. 7. The proposition of law laid down in these case laws by the Jurisdictional High Court as well as by the ITAT Kolkata on these issues are in favour of the assessee. These are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. The ld. Departmental Representative, though not leaving his ground, could not controvert the claim of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue in question is covered by the above cited decisions of the Hon ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court and the ITAT. I am bound to follow the same. 8. In view of the above discussion I delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
