TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The appeal was admitted on the following questions of law:- "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the ITAT was correct to hold that 11,000 shares of M/s Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. Purchased by the appellant on 10.11.2003 from broker M/s Elbee Portfolio Pvt. Ltd vide contract Note dated 10.11.2003 and received in the Demat account and thereafter sold vide Contract Note dated 26.2.2005 of the broker M/s D.N. Kansal Securities Pvt. Ltd. And sale proceeds of share credited in the bank account of the appellant, still it was rightly held that shares sold were not the same shares purchased in November, 2003? 2. Whether the ITAT rightly treated the sale price of 11,000 shares, as income from undisclosed source....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee was long term capital gain arising on the sale of 11,000 shares of a company M/s Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. The Assessing Officer had disbelieved the long term capital gain and made a corresponding addition of Rs. 11,77,000/- under Section 68 of the Act. Upon appeal the assessee adduced evidence in the shape of contract notes/bills receipt; payments made through banking channel; contract notes and; copies of passbook of its Demat account in support of it thus asserted its claim of long term capital gain as genuine and correct. Qua the payment made by the assessee for purchase of shares, it was not disputed by the department that the same was made through banking channel. It is also an undisputed fact that 11,000 shares were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s noticed while the assessee claimed to have purchased the shares in the month of February 2003 at the cost of Rs. 55,594/-. They were found recorded in the Demat account of the assessee, for the first time in November 2004. Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent as also perused the record. It cannot be denied that the fact of purchase transaction being recorded late in the Demat passbook raises a doubt as to its genuineness and it is also true that this evidence is relevant to the decision on the point in issue in this case, yet, this was not the only evidence relevant to the issue. There exists other evidence, adduced by the assessee in this case, in shap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the lower appellate authority nor it has dealt with the reasoning and findings of the lower appellate authority while passing the order of reversal. It is then difficult for this court to the uphold as correct the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal. We are therefore of the view that the Tribunal's finding is not conclusive, and it has been arrived by following a faulty process. The Tribunal has not considered all relevant and other material evidence existing on record before disbelieving the claim of the assessee. The Tribunal has also not specifically dealt with the findings recorded by the CIT (Appeals). In view of the above discussion, the finding of the Tribunal and the consequential order cannot be sustained. The order ....