9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has claimed exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act, long-term capital gain of Rs. 92,01,732/- in respect of sale of shares of M/s. Kailesh Auto Finance Limited. The assessee claimed that 3,00,000 shares of M/s. Careful Projects Advisory Ltd. had been purchased on 13.03.2013 @1/-per share. Subsequently, M/s. Careful Projects Advisory Ltd. was merged with M/s. Kailesh Auto Finance Ltd. in a scheme of amalgamation. 2.2. The AO referred to the investigation carried out by the DIT(Inv) Kolkatta regarding bogus LTCG/STCL/trading loss through dealings in shares of 'penny stocks' and 84 companies listed in the Bombay Stock Exchange were identified as penny stock companies, one of which is M/s. Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. The AO referred to the sworn statement of Shri Sanjay Dhirajlal Vora, Regional Director (East Zone) of M/s Anand Rathi Shares & Brokers Ltd., recorded on 8.4.2015, wherein Shri Vora confirmed that M/s. Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. is a penny stock company. Statement of Shri Sunil Dokania, accommodation entry provider, recorded on 12.06.2015 was also relied upon, wherein Shri Dokania lists M/s. Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. as one of the paper companies managed and controlled by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in March 2013 @ Rs. 1/- per share. Subsequently, Careful Projects Advisory Ltd. was merged with Kailesh Auto Finance Ltd. In a scheme of amalgamation. 7.3 Kailash Auto Finance Company Ltd. has been identified as a 'penny stock' company. The modus operandi of penny stock companies and the entire process of obtaining bogus Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital loss entries through price manipulation of the shares of the 'penny stock companies' has been discussed by the AO in the assessment order. Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. has been listed amongst the 84 'penny stock companies identified by the Investigation Wing Kolkatta, after a prolonged investigation. Trading in the shares of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. was suspended by the Exchange after directions from SEBI vide notice No. 20160804-24 dated 04.08.2016. The financials and the trading pattern of the scrip have been independently examined by the AO and it is seen that they fall within the general framework of the financials and scrip trading patterns of 'penny stock companies'. The share prices have fluctuated in a bell shape curve, irrespective of the general market trend. The AO has referred to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... General of Income-tax Investigation in Mumbai, Delhi, Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Bhopal, Chandigarh, Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kochi, Kolkata, Lucknow, Patna, Pune and Director General (International Taxation) Mumbai. The investigation report dated 27-4- 2015, which is available in the public domain narrates the modus operandi adopted for the purpose of claiming bogus LTCG. The stocks which were the subject matter of transaction were referred to as "penny stocks" and the companies whose shares were traded in the various stocks exchanges. The report further states that in the whole project total 84 BSE listed penny stocks have been identified after which several search and survey operations were conducted in office premises of more than 32 share broking entities who have accepted that they were actively involved in bogus LTCL/STCL scam. Surveys were also conducted in the office premises of many accommodation entry providers and their statements were recorded in which they have admitted their role in the scam. The beneficiaries of more than Rs. 38,000 crores have been identified and segregated, totally 60,000 Pan Nos. of the beneficiaries have been identified which is in the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heavy as the facts establish that the shares which were traded by the assessees had phenomenal and fanciful rise in price in a short span of time and more importantly after a period of 17 to 22 months, thereafter has been a steep fall which has led to huge claims of STCL. Therefore, unless and until the assessee discharges such burden of proof, the addition made by the assessing officer cannot be faulted. 76. It was argued that unless there are foundational facts, circumstantial evidence cannot be relied on. This argument does not merit acceptance as wealth of information and facts were on record which is the outcome of the investigation on the companies, stock brokers, entry operators etc. Based on those foundational facts the department has adopted the concept of "working backward" leading to the assessees. While at that relevant stage the sounding circumstances, the normal human conduct of a prudent investor, the probabilities that may spill over, were all taken into consideration to negative the claim for exception made by the assessee. Therefore, the department was fully justified in taking note of the prevailing circumstances to decide against the assessees. ............ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is required to be deleted.
2. The Ld. CIT has not passed speaking order as the Ld. CIT has not considered the facts of the case and purely on presumption passed appellate order.
5. Today is the 10th time of hearing of this appeal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and no Authorization given in favour of any Representative. Even in the previous occasion only stereo-typic adjournment letters were filed by the assessee and no evidence or Paper Book filed by the assessee. This clearly shows that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the above appeal. Further the ground raised by the assessee is also general in nature without adducing any evidences in support of its claim. In the absence of the same, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition after calling for Remand Report from the Assessing Officer. Further the case laws relied by the A.O. and CIT(A) are in favour of the Department. Thus the findings arrived by Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference and the ground raised by the assessee is devoid of merits and liable to be rejected.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06-01-2025 X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
