2018 (7) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 20/12/2011 wherein the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 15.15 Lacs as against returned income of Rs. 10.35 Lacs filed by the assessee on 07/10/2005 which was initially processed u/s 143(1). The only effective grounds pressed before us by Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee [AR] are Ground Nos. 5 & 6 and the same reads as under:- 5. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer of invoking the provisions of Section 69 of the Act and treating the sale considering as unexplained investment. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in considering genuine transactions as hawala transactions without....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y stock exchange. Finally the sale consideration of Rs. 15.15 Lacs arising out of the said transactions was held to be bogus speculative trade transaction and therefore added as unexplained investment u/s 69 in the hands of the assessee, being taxable at normal rate and against which set-off of business loss was not available to the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the same on legal grounds as well as on merits with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 22/05/2014 wherein the matter was concluded in the following manner:- 5.2. Ground No.2 to 5-Regarding the addition of unexplained investment u/s.69 of I.T.Act, it is noted that i) the controlling person of the group companies from where the appellant ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Under these circumstances, it is quite clear that when the A.O. has evidence to show that there has not been any actual purchases and sales from such parties, under these circumstances, the assessee is required to prove otherwise. Neither at the time of assessment stage nor at the appeal proceedings, the appellant could rebut the findings of I.T. enquiries. Under these circumstances it is held that the sale proceeds shown by the appellant appears to be the income of the appellant, routed through the hawala transactions, the same deserves to be taxable as such in the hands of appellant as undisclosed income. Since the appellant's net gain is the difference of sale proceeds and purchase price of the alleged shares, the A.O. is directed to ta....