9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1009X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Sh. Om Prakash Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Moradabad, dated 14.05.2019, pertaining to the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT(A) ] erred on facts and in law in confirming addition made by the assessing officer in the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act ). 2. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in denying exemption of long term capital gain ( LTCG ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on facts and in law in not appreciating that all details and documentary evidences qua sale of shares were furnished before the assessing officer and no document was produced by the assessing officer to controvert such information/ evidences. 8. Without prejudice to above, the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer in making addition under section 68 of the Act without appreciating that addition under that section was not sustainable in law. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary from the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing. 2. No one appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. It is seen from the record that the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of shares of Esteem Bio Organic Food Processing Limited was accommodation entry arrangement. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the source of the capital introduced and he proceeded to make addition of this amount u/s 68 of the Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer assessed the assessee s income at Rs. 37,14, 927/- against the returned income of Rs. 2,87,910/-. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(Appeals), who, after considering the submissions, sustained the finding of the assessing authority. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. At the outset learned DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has given a finding of fact regarding genuineness of the transaction. He contended that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... winning were from a jackpot. These receipts were tested on the touch stone of human probability and it was found that apparent was not real. That it was contrary to statistical theory and experience of the frequencies and probabilities. The exceptional luck enjoyed by the appellant was held to be beyond preponderance of probability. Hence the Hon'ble Apex Court has affirmed the view that it would not be unreasonable to infer that the appellant had not really participated in any of the races except to the extent of purchasing the winning tickets after the events presumably with unaccounted funds. When the present case is examined on the touch stone of above case law, it is clear that these transactions of the appellant can by no stretch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration has been received through banking channel and shares were sold in stock exchange. The shares in which he has invested belong to paper company. Its financial position is extremely poor and it does not seem to be carrying out a regular business. The exponential rise in its share prise is nothing else but a manipulation by the syndicate of operators involved in the scam. In the present case, the appellant's explanation that the said receipt is on account of investment in shares, whereby shares of unknown company have jumped in no time has been totally rejected by the AO. The appellant has not at all been able to adduce cogent evidences in this regard. There is no economic or financial justification for the sale price of thes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
