TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 1282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,26,685/- which the Assessing Officer had made on account of denial of long term capital gain. 3. The brief facts of the case as noted in the assessment order are that the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 153A after search took place in the premises of assessee. During assessment proceedings u/s 153A, the Assessing Officer observed that assessee had declared a capital gain to the tune of Rs. 2,78,26,685/- on account of long term capital gain on account sale of 1 lakh shares of Geefcee Finance Ltd. The Assessing Officer doubted the claim of assessee regarding long term capital gain and recorded the reply of assessee with regard to various questions in the assessment order. From the reply of assessee recorded in assessment order the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- genuine and the capital gain is being added back to the income of the assessee. The amount being added back which is Rs. 2,78,26,685A is worked out as under:- Cost of 1 lakh shares @ Rs. 11 per share 1100000 Indexed cost of the shares for the year under consideration 1167821 Sales consideration 28994516 Balance capital gains being added back to the Income 27826685 As per above discussion and the material available on record, the income of the assessee is determined as under: Returned Income 4642140 Add:- Addition as discussed in para 3(a) 27468825 Assessed Income 32468825 (Rounded off) 32468830" 4. Aggrieved with the addition the assessee filed appeal before learned CIT(A) and su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edited in assessee's bank account which is further found recorded in the Income Tax Return and allowed as exempt by the Assessing Officer. As against this clear documentary evidence in favour of the appellant, the Assessing Officer has merely rejected the contention of purchase on the basis of suspicion arising out of reckless/casual replies given to various questions raised by the Assessing Officer in the assessment proceedings. It is important to appreciate here that the assessee had been subjected to search and seizure proceedings under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the search proceedings did not lead to recovery of any incriminating evidence to show that the transaction of purchase of shares was arranged as suspected b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hold the view that the entire transaction of purchase/sale of shares effected over a period of two years was a sham transaction. The addition being without any logical basis is directed to be deleted." 5. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. At the outset, the learned DR submitted that the purchase of shares declared by assessee was bogus and also the sales declared by assessee were bogus as the shares were rarely traded at the stock exchange and in a short period of time the value of shares had rises unreasonably from Rs. 10/- to Rs. 200/- and therefore, Assessing Officer had rightly made the addition. 7. The learned AR, on the other hand, submitted that assessee had purchased shares in the physical form and the share....