9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1020X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessees. (c) Disallowance of deduction of interest claimed u/s. 24 of the Act against the property income. 3. We shall discuss the facts prevailing in the case of Smt. Pankaj Agrawal. Identical facts are prevailing in the case of Smt. Rekha Devi Agrawal also. Hence the decision taken in the case of Smt. Pankaj Agrawal can be conveniently applied in the other case. 4. The first issue is related to the assessment of sale proceeds of shares sold by the assessee. The assessee, Smt Pankaj Agrawal had purchased 12500 shares in M/s Paridhi Properties Ltd., at the face value of Rs. 10/- each from the promoters. The assessee paid the purchase consideration of Rs. 1,25,000/- by depositing cash in the bank account of above said company. She got share certificate on 21-03-2011. The above said company got merged with M/s Luminaire Technologies Ltd., as per the order dated 207-07-2012 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. Accordingly, the assessee got 1,25,000 shares of Re1.00 each in M/s Luminaire Technologies Ltd, vide share certificate dated 04-09-2012. All the shares were dematerialized on 08-11-2012. 5. During the year under consideration, the assessee sold 46000 shares for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uiry against the assessee or its broker. 9. We also notice that the assessee has (a) purchased these shares by paying consideration through banking channels. (b) shares of M/s Luminaire Technologies Ltd were allotted to the assessee in a scheme of amalgamation approved by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. (b) dematerialized the shares and kept the same in the Demat account. (c) sold the shares through stock exchange platform (d) received the sale consideration through banking channels. Further, the shares have entered and exited the demat account of the assessee. We notice that the AO himself has not found any defect/deficiencies in the evidences furnished by the assessee with regard to purchase and sale of shares. Further, the AO has not brought on record any material to show that the assessee was part of the group which involved in the manipulation of prices of shares. Hence, there is no reason to suspect the purchase and sale of shares undertaken by the assessee. 10. In support of our decision, we may refer to the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Shyam Pawar (54 taxmann.com 108)(Bom), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has observed as under: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessee's DMAT account, yet they are termed as arranged transactions and projected to be real, then, such conclusion which has been reached by the Commissioner and the Assessing Officer required a deeper scrutiny. It was also revealed during the course of inquiry by the Assessing Officer that the Calcutta Stock Exchange records showed that the shares were purchased for code numbers S003 and R121 of Sagar Trade Pvt Ltd. and Rockey Marketing Pvt. Ltd. respectively. Out of these two, only Rockey Marketing Pvt.Ltd. is listed in the appraisal report and it is stated to be involved in the modus-operandi. It is on this material that he holds that the transactions in sale and purchase of shares are doubtful and not genuine. In relation to Assessee's role in all this, all that the Commissioner observed is that the Assessee transacted through brokers at Calcutta, which itself raises doubt about the genuineness of the transactions and the financial result and performance of the Company was not such as would justify the increase in the share prices. Therefore, he reached the conclusion that certain operators and brokers devised the scheme to convert the unaccounted money of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubstantial question of law. They are accordingly dismissed. There would no order as to costs. 8. Even the additional question cannot be said to be substantial question of law, because it arises in the context of same transactions, dealings, same investigation and same charge or allegation of accommodation of unaccounted money being converted into accounted or regular as such. The relevant details pertaining to the shares were already on record. This question is also a fall out of the issue or question dealt with by the Tribunal and pertaining to the addition of Rs. 25,93,150/-. Barring the figure of loss that is stated to have been taken, no distinguishable feature can be or could be placed on record. For the same reasons, even this additional question cannot be termed as substantial question of law." 11. In the case of PCIT vs. Ziauddin A Siddique (Income tax Appeal No. 2012 of 2017 dated 4th March, 2022), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has observed as under:- "2. We have considered the impugned order with the assistance of learned counsels and we have no reason to interfere. There is a finding of fact by the Tribunal that the transaction of purchase and sale of shares of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remained for more than one year. After a period of one year the shares were sold by the said broker on various dates in the Kolkatta Stock Exchange. Pursuant to sale of shares the said broker had also issued contract notes cum bill for sale and these contract notes and bills were made available during the course of appellate proceedings. On the sale of shares respondent effected delivery of shares by way of Demat instruction slips and also received payment from Kolkatta Stock Exchage. The cheque received was deposited in respondent's bank account. In view thereof, the CIT(A) found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. The Tribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed on facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of Stock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken, contract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of Stock Exchange. The ITAT therefore, in our view, rightly concluded that there was no merit in the appeal." 13. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the decisions rendered by the j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
