TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1011
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pal Commissioner of Income Tax ("Pr. CIT") u/s 263 of the Act on the basis of suspicion, conjecture and surmises is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 2. The order u/s 263 passed by the Pr. CIT is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as detailed replies filed before the Pr. CIT, in response to the notice u/s 263, have not been considered while passing the final order. Hence the order u/s 263 is liable to be quashed. 3. That the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer ("AO") u/s 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue to the extent that no addition on account of alleged commission has been added. 4. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g that "it was an accommodation entry taken by the Assessee by paying commission in cash to the entry operation for arranging the said accommodation entry". However no such observation is recorded by AO. 9. Without prejudice, that the direction given by the Pr. CIT are illegal, bad in law and also contrary. 10. That without prejudice, the Pr. CIT has wrongly and illegally held that the order passed by AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, when no independent enquiry has been made by Pr. CIT. Hence the notice issued U/s 263 and the order passed u/s 263 is illegal and bad in law 11. That the Pr. CIT has passed the order u/s 263 ignoring the evidence, documents filed by the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rices have been manipulated, it is held that the assessee in connivance with certain "entry operators" have misused the stock exchange system to generate fictitious LTCG and thereby have avoided payment of legitimate taxes. Hence, an amount of Rs. 2,53,91,809 (sale cost of Rander Corp. of Rs. 44,33,146/- and Effingo Textiles of Rs. 2,02,82,203 + purchase cost of Rander Corp. of Rs. 4,43,110/- and Efingo textiles of Rs. 2,33,350/-) is held to be bogus and accordingly disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee under the head "income from other sources". On the reasons mentioned above, I am satisfied that the assessee has concealed his income and furnished inaccurate particulars, hence, penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) is being i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the hike of share price of a company, sudden down fall in the rates of shares of those companies, after completion of assessee's transactions and other attending circumstances behind the alleged transactions, but the Assessing Officer has failed to consider and examine that in the case of bogus purchase and sale of shares, the element of commission payment is always involved and therefore, the Assessing Officer was in error in not making any addition towards unexplained commission for the above arrangement of capital gains. Therefore, the ld. PCIT was justified in setting aside the assessment order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have gone through the entire materia....