9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AT:- It is not in dispute that transactions were entered by the assessee with three sub brokers - The maximum amount of investment on one date of derivative transaction was Rs 1,27,20,985/- considering in aggregate of all the three parties. It is not in dispute that the assessee had incurred total loss in derivative transactions amounting to Rs 14,43,040/- which was separately disallowed by the ld. AO in the assessment. This point was not agitated by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). Plea of the assessee is that she had not deposited any margin money with the sub-brokers - We find that the ld. AR placed on record the ledger account copies of the three sub-brokers along with contract notes of their respective brokers. - The total los ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) on 30/12/2016 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the disallowance made on account of derivative loss in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is an individual and deriving income from business, house property and from other sources. The return of income for the Asst. Year 2014-15 was filed by the assessee on 30.9.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 57,54,800/-. The ld. AO observed that assessee had claimed loss on derivatives of Rs. 14,43,040/- which was adjusted against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed investment made in derivatives u/s 69 of the Act and added a sum of Rs 1,27,20,985/- in the assessment. 5. The assessee submitted that the ld. AO had not understood the modus operandi of the activities carried out by the assessee in derivative transactions. The assessee submitted that she had undertaken derivative transaction through sub-brokers namely PK Gupta Sons (HUF), Shri Krishna Shutterings Pvt Ltd and Shri Subhash Chand Gupta. It was submitted that a) Shri Subhash Chand Gupta (through Ficus Securities Private Limited) As per copy of account of the assessee in the books of the above party, the derivative transaction resulting in loss of Rs 2,50,000/- against sale of Rs 4,87,400/-. The total sale effected has been treat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hree sub brokers namely Subhash Chand Gupta who acted through Ficus Securities Pvt Ltd ; Shri Krishna Shutterings Pvt Ltd who acted through Ashlar Securities Private Limited and P K Gupta Sons (HUF) who acted through Ashlar Securities Private Limited. The maximum amount of investment on one date of derivative transaction was Rs 1,27,20,985/- considering in aggregate of all the three parties. It is not in dispute that the assessee had incurred total loss in derivative transactions amounting to Rs 14,43,040/- which was separately disallowed by the ld. AO in the assessment. This point was not agitated by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). The ld.AR before us explained the entire gamut of transactions carried out by the assessee through sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pages 4 to 43 of the Paper Book. The total loss incurred by the assessee out of doing transactions with aforesaid three parties was Rs 14,43,040/- which has been paid by the assessee on the following dates from her bank account maintained with State Bank of India New Delhi DDA Flats, Kalkaji Branch from Account Number 00000065022555400 :- 10.3.14 Rs. 7,10,000/- vide Cheque No. 354593 10.3.14 Rs.2,60,000/- vide Cheque No. 354592 10.3.14 Rs. 2,50,000/- vide Cheque No. 354591 13.3.14 Rs. 2,23,040/- vide Cheque No. 354842 TOTAL Rs. 14,43,040/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
