9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r penalizing or any order has been passed against the assessee. In these circumstances addition on the basis of conjunctures and surmise has been rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided against assessee. - I.T.A. No. 6875/Mum/2019 - - - Dated:- 9-12-2021 - Shri Shamim Yahya , Accountant Member For the Appellant : Smita Verma For the Respondents : Mitali Gopani ORDER Per Shri Shamim Yahya , ( AM ) This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-57 dated 06.08.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2011-12. 2. Grounds of appeal read as under:- 1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition holding as under:- The facts of the case are the Assessing officer had received information that the penny scrip SVC Resource Ltd. has been used for generating bogus LTCG/STCL by manipulating the transactions in the Stock Exchange in order to route the unaccounted money of the beneficiaries into their accounts. The Assessing officer on the basis of information that the assessee had Traded in SVC Resource Ltd. amounting to ₹ 1,60,978/- reopened the case u/s. 147 of the IT Act. The Assessing officer has contended in assessment order that the assessee submitted the details including broker note, ledger copy of broker, global report Bank A/c. However the Assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount. Moreover the global Report shows that the appellant has been purchasing/selling many other scrips also. Short Term Capital Loss has not been claimed in return of Income moreover the gain received from the purchase script SVC Resources is very meagre only ₹ 1329/-. Hence the assessing officer's assertion that loss/gain has been manipulated by the assessee does not seen to be correct. Hence the addition made by AO is not correct the same is hereby deleted appeal is allowed. 5. Against the above order revenue is in appeal before us. 6. I have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. I find that in this case AO has made addition u/s. 68 only on the basis of surmise and conjunctures. Ld. CIT(A) has given a finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
