ITAT allows Assessee's appeal, emphasizing specific adverse materials for additions. Case remanded for fresh decision.

The ITAT allowed the Assessee's appeal against the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT under Section 263, directing the deletion of the addition made on the Assessee's claim of exempt income on LTCG. The ITAT emphasized the need for specific adverse materials to sustain additions under Section 68 and highlighted the importance of providing adequate hearing opportunities to the Assessee. The case was remanded to the Pr. CIT for a fresh decision, considering details provided by the Assessee and a previous High Court order distinguishing between lack of inquiry and inadequate inquiry.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against order of Ld. Pr. CIT under Section 263 - Allegations of bogus transactions for laundering income - Detailed scrutiny of share transactions - Lack of inquiry or inadequate inquiry - Opportunity of hearing to Assessee - Restoration of case for de novo decision.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, alleging that the order was void and erred in setting aside the assessment order passed by the DCIT. The Assessee earned income from various sources, including trading shares of 'NCL Research Ltd.' resulting in long term capital gains. The Ld. Pr. CIT observed lack of information on the Demat account of the Assessee and suspected bogus transactions for income laundering. The Assessee contended that shares were purchased through a broker on the BSE, payments made via banking channels, and provided necessary documents to support the transactions.

The Assessee cited precedents where lack of inquiry did not warrant adverse actions under Section 263. The ITAT ruled in favor of the Assessee, stating that without specific adverse materials, the addition under Section 68 could not be sustained. The Assessee's claim of exempt income on LTCG was allowed, and the addition was directed to be deleted. The Assessee also referenced a High Court order distinguishing between lack of inquiry and inadequate inquiry, emphasizing that the Commissioner cannot act solely on a different opinion.

The Ld. CIT/DR alleged that the Assessee misused shares of NCL Research Ltd. for bogus LTCG to conceal undisclosed income. After hearing both sides and examining the records, the ITAT noted the comprehensive inquiry by the A.O. into the share transactions. Due to the Assessee's absence before the Ld. Pr. CIT, the ITAT granted another hearing opportunity. The case was restored to the Pr. CIT for a fresh decision after considering details from the Assessee and the Kolkata ITAT order.

In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the Assessee's appeal, subject to specified conditions, and for statistical purposes. The case was remanded for a de novo decision by the Pr. CIT after a thorough examination of the submitted details and providing adequate hearing opportunities to the Assessee.

---