2019 (4) TMI 210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in short the 'Act') dated 05.03.2014. 2. Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue reads as under: "i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in allowing Loss of Rs. 81,90,769/- resulting from sale of shares of Tatia Skylines & Health Forms Ltd. and J.P. Morgan and also erred in appreciating the facts relying on extraneous and irrelevant considerations. 3. Brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee has claimed Rs. 88,43,720/- as long term capital loss. It was found that during the previous year the assessee sold shares of Tatia Skylines & Health Farms Ltd. and JP Morgan for consideration as follows: Name of the Script Purchase price claimed Date/year of purchase Sale pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the addition. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard both the parties perused the material available on record, we note that this ground of Revenue relates to disallowance of loss incurred under the head "Long Term Capital Gains" of Rs. 88,43,720/- arising from sale of unquoted shares of Tatia Skylines & Health Farms Ltd. of Rs. 81,90,769/- and JP Morgan Rs. 6,52,950/- both totalRs.88,43,719/-.The particulars regarding the year of acquisition, cost price, indexed cost and sale consideration were furnished in the course of assessment proceedings. Admittedly, the shares held in Tatia Skylines & Health Farms Ltd. are not quoted in any recognized Stock E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s arises from the sale of 20,56,850 shares of JP Morgan wherein the assesseefailed to furnish any details are not allowed and balance loss is allowed. Hence, A.O. is directed to delete the addition accordingly and balanceloss of Rs. 6,52,950/- is confirmed.That being so, we decline to interfere with the order of Id. C.I T.(A) in deleting the aforesaid addition. His order on this addition is, therefore, upheld and the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 6. Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: ii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in proceeding on extraneous belief and misconception of law in allowing Rs. 2,79,962/- out of Dyes & Chemicals u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Ac....