2016 (12) TMI 620

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ial question of law: " Whether the Tribunal erred on facts and in law in upholding the validity of the order passed under section 263 of the Act?" 3 For the Assessment Year 199798, the Appellant filed its return of income, declaring a loss of Rs. 27.46 lakhs. The details of this loss on account of dealing in shares were as under: Name Opening Stock Qty. Value Purchase Qty. Value Sales  Qty. Value Profit/Loss Nath Pulp & Paper Mills (quoted) 119757 62,14,080 780243 2,34,07,290 900000 3,60,00,000 63,78,630 Rama Pulp & Papers (quoted) 150000 75,93,750 464000 1,39,20,000 614000 2,45,60,000 30,46,250 Mayo (I) L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Balance Sheet of M/s. Mayo (I) (P) Ltd. nor the valuation of the shares. This loss appeared to be contrived to set off the profits of Rs. 96.24 lakhs made on trading in listed shares. Thus, the CIT opined that the transaction of shares in Mayo (I) (P) Ltd., was a sham transaction. Therefore, he directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 7 Being aggrieved, the Appellant filed appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 15th September, 2004 dismissed the Assessee's appeal. The impugned order held that the exercise of power by the CIT(A) under Section 263 of the Act to revise the Assessment Order dated 24th February, 2000 cannot be found fault with for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xamined the rival submissions made before us. We find that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had by a letter dated 12th January, 2000 for the subject Assessment Year sought various details along with documentary evidence, if any, to enable the Assessing Officer to complete the Assessment. One enquiry in the letter dated 12th January, 2000 mentioned at Serial No.8 thereof was the method of valuation in case of unquoted shares (i.e.listed shares) namely M/s. Mayo India Ltd. The Appellant responded to the above letter dated 12th January, 2000 by its letter dated 31st January, 2000. However, the letter dated 31st January, 2000 did not address the enquiry at Sr. No.8 in the letter dated 12th January, 2000 namely ....