TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 592
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....transaction giving rise to capital gain are merely an accommodation route, through which the unaccounted money of the assessee has converted into accounted money in the grab of long term capital gain arising on account of purchases and sale of shares." "iv. The learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law and in circumstances of the case in not appreciating the Supreme Court decision in the following cases - Macdowells and Company Ltd Vs CTO 154 ITR 148, CIT Vs. Sri Meenakshi Mills Ltd. 63 ITR 609, CIT Vs Durgaprasad More - 82 ITR 540 and Juggilal Kamapat Vs CIT 73 ITR 702 (SC) "v. The learned CIT(A) has erred in holding the details filed before the A.O. proved the genuineness of the transaction without verifying the details himself as there is no finding in his order that the details filed were duly verified by him and found to be correct". "vi. The learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that after verification and from copy of invoices of expenditure found from the premises of the assessee, it is quite clear that the assessee is having a lavish life style and household drawing shown by the assessee were incredibly low". "vii. The assessee prays that the order o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2/M/09). As stated above, in these appeals, one of the grounds of appeal is about addition made by the AO u/s.68 of the Act on account of shown long term capital gain (LTCG). 3.1. As per brief facts of the case, a search and seizure action u/s. 132 (1) of the Act was carried out on 01-09-2005 in the group cases of Dilbagh Raj Arora based at Kanpur, Mumbai and Delhi. The assessee HUF is located at Mumbai. During the search proceedings it was found that the assessee group-consisting of Shri Dilbagh Rai Arora, his sons S/Shri Som Arora, Arunkumar Arora, Praveen Kumar Arora Nirmal Arora, their family members and HUFs.-had shown long term capital gain (LTCG) in their respective returns on sale of shares of various listed companies that was set off against brought forward long term capital loss of earlier years. In the assessment orders passed u/s 153A of the Act, the AO held that share transactions mentioned above were sham/arranged transactions and that the entire sale proceeds recorded in books of accounts of the assessee group, including the assessee HUF, represented unexplained cash credits. Particulars of returned income and assessed income u/s 153A of the Act, in respect of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he FAA. Grounds of Appeal Nos. 1 and 3 to 5 of the AO for the Assessment Years 2000-01, 2004-05 and 2006-07 stand dismissed. 5. Next Grounds of Appeal for all the four assessment years are about low withdrawals by the assessee for his house-hold expenses (Ground of appeal Nos. 2and 6 for the AYs. 2000-01, 2004-05 and 2006-07 and Ground Nos.1 and 2 for AY.2002-03). As stated earlier the AO has made addition to the income of the assessee for the Assessment Years 2000-01, 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2006-07 as mentioned in the table at paragraph3.2. FAA while disposing the appeal filed by the assessee, in this regard, found that following was the withdrawal by the assessee HUF, Smt. Pooja Arora and and Sh.Praveen Kumar (Individual)for the Assessment Years concerned. A.Y. Drawings by Praveen Kumar Arora (HUF.) Drawings by Pooja Arora Drawings by Sh. Praveen Kumar (Ind.) Total 2000-01 2.58 lakhs 2.4 lakhs 4.98 lakhs 2002-03 1.70 lakhs -- 1.98 lakhs 3.68 lakhs 2004-05 6.11 lakhs 3.6 lakhs 60,348/- 10.32 lakhs 2006-07 6.04 lakhs 3 lakhs 9.04 lakhs Total 28.02 lakhs 5.1. After considering the Assessment Order and the submissions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the donor from sale of Apartment for which the appropriate authority of the Department has granted no objection certificate u/s 269UL(3) of the Act, that the same donor had made similar gifts to other group members of the appellant i.e. Rs.75 lakhs to Shri Dilbagh Rai Arora (HUF) and Rs.40 lakhs each to Shri Som Arora (HUF) and Shri Rajkumar Arora (HUF) of the same family, that AO had not brought on record any adverse material against the creditworthiness of the donor, that in the absence of any enquiry or any adverse material about the creditworthiness of the donor, the AO was not justified in holding that the donors creditworthiness was in doubt, that conduct of the donor or the donee or such circumstances which create doubt in the genuineness of the transaction of the gift had not been brought on record by the AO, that no enquiries in this direction were carried out by the AO, that the gift was made of huge amount, in the absence of any material to doubt the genuineness of the gift, would not be sufficient to treat the gift as non-genuine or bogus, that the donor has confirmed that she had voluntarily gifted the amount to the donee out of her natural love and affection, that se....