9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted in good faith. Tribunal, therefore, correctly held that the AO had acted only on assumption which was misconceived. CIT(A) order dismissing the revenue's appeal was confirmed. - BIREN VAISHNAV AND BHARGAV D. KARIA, JJ. Varun K. Patel, Sr. Standing Counsel and Dev D. Patel, Adv. for the Appellant. ORDER Biren Vaishnav J. This Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated 11-11-2022 passed in ITO v. Smt. Mamta Rajivkumar Agarwal IT Appeal No. 1788 (Ahd) of 2019 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2 The substantial questions of law raised in the appeal read thus: (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 39,3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Relying on several decisions of the Tribunal, the CIT(A) held thus: 2.2 I have considered the facts of the case assessment order in also the submission made by the appellant. I find that AO has made the addition by considering the script as penny stock. AO has stated the appellant has not given reason for purchase of shares and also the price of share has increased very steeply during a short period and has also fallen down quickly. AO has also stated that this company has no credential and the sale rates are hiked artificially with no real buyers so that the inference of sale being bogus is correct. I find that the appellant has duly submitted all the documents with regards to purchase and sales of shares which includes copy of bills of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon various case laws which also supports her contention. I therefore treat the transaction as genuine and direct the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 39,37,426/-. The ground no. 1 of appeal is allowed. 3.3 The Tribunal confirmed the findings of the CIT(A) insofar as, it held in favour of the assessee. Findings of the Tribunal indicate that the assumption of the AO that the transaction carried out by the assessee are similar to the modus operandi of penny stock was misplaced. The Tribunal on facts observed thus: 11.1 .On analyzing the facts of the present case, we note that the AO on one hand has alleged that the entire transaction was bogus but on the other hand the AO himself has allowed the cost of acquisition against the sale of shares ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exchange with respect to rigging up of share price of M/s Shree Nath Commercial Finance Ltd. Similarly, there was no finding with subsequent market price of the impugned scipt. We also note that there was no dispute raised by the Revenue with respect to the following facts: 1. Shares were purchased through broker on recognized stock exchange. 2. Purchase consideration of share was made through cheque. 3. Share was duly dematerialized in D-mat account. 4. Shares were sold through stock exchange after the payment of STT. The transactions have been confirmed by brokers. 5. The payments were received through ECS in the D-mat account. 6. Inflow of shares are reflected in D-mat account. Shares are transferred through D-mat account and buyer are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
