9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 637X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are disposed of by this composite order. 2. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in all the four appeals relates to the addition on account of Penny Stocks involving the shares of "Mishika Finance". The assessee purchased the 300 shares from M/s Pyramid Trading & Finance Ltd. presently known as Mishka Finance & Trading Limited. The aforesaid shares have been transferred by M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd.. As per the SEBI's website, the said company, M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd. was one of the delisted company since long. The share value went up substantially and it is to the benefit of the assessee. Assessee sold these shares and the gains were claimed exempt. Considering the Penny Stocks and off-market nature of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om 47.75/- to Rs. 55/- per share. Even though the two respective transactions for purchase and sale of shares were routed through two different brokers, yet the Assessing Officer did not believe the astronomical rise in share price of a company from Rs. 3/- to Rs. 55/- per share in a short-term. The assessee lost its case before the Tribunal. Confirming the order of the Tribunal, the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the burden of providing that income was subject to tax is on the revenue but to show that the transaction was genuine, burden was primarily on the assessee. As per the Hon'ble High Court, the Assessing Officer was to apply the test of human probabilities for deciding genuineness or otherwise of a particular transa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of appeal is accordingly dismissed." 4. Aggrieved with the above conclusion of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal :- "1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 10,09,687/- u/s 68 as income from undisclosed source in respect of income shown as long term capital gains from sale of shares. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in denying exemption u/s 10(38) for income shown as long term capital gains from sale of shares. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the claim of long term capital gains on sale of shares was fully supported and genuine without there bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra). 8. On hearing both the sides, I perused the facts of the case, orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) and the judgements cited above in this regard. It is an undisputed fact that the shares involved are Penny Stocks and the Assessing Officer did not find any mistake in the documentation furnished by the assessee. The Assessing Officer alleges that the documentation is self-serving. Further, I also perused the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and find the contents of para 13 and 14 of the said order are relevant in this regard. For the sake of completeness, the said para 13 and 14 are extracted hereunder :- "13. In view of the aforesaid factual position, we have no hesit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
