TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1025
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Order (Pg. 5 of Order), without having on record any fact which will support the inference drawn as under in the case of the appellant :- a These transactions were pre-planned by the operators as discovered and stated in the report submitted by the investigation wing Kolkata. The modus operandi isthe same as found during the various search conducted at Kolkata, Mumbai and Ahmadabad. b The rise in price of the shares of Luminaire technologies Ltd was not in accordance with the performance/credentials of the company. This shows that the prices were artificially rigged up. c It is observed that during the rally of rise in the price, the shares were thinly traded but the price of share increased many fold, d Many of the persons claiming such exemption have accepted of having obtained LTCG by way of pre-arranged transactions through market operators and availed the benefit of IDS, 2016 and claimed the same during the pending scrutiny proceedings. e M/S Luminaire Technology is actually a shell company as seen from the financials of the company. The company has no business activity or any other future prospects which leads to rise in the price of its shares. f As verified fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Pr. CIT was not convinced with the said reply of the assessee for the reason that the AO could not suspect from the documents filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings that there could be a conspiracy in generating any bogus LTCG; the material fact was further detected through search action undertaken by the Investigation Wing of the Department that these types of LTCG were not general/regular transactions but were carried out by a chain of brokers/intermediaries/operators in the share market to convert the money held by various entities into white by way of misuse of provisions of section 10(38) of the Act. Examining the financials of LTL, the Pr. CIT observed that it had no operating income and no profit/dividend was declared since FY 2007-08. Further, he found that the shares of LTL were thinly traded upto June 2012 wherein the price of the shares is rigged upto around Rs. 40/- and thereafter, profit booking started and suddenly the volume of trade arose to accommodate the beneficiaries of bogus LTCG. Further, it is noted by him that the funds provided by the beneficiaries are infused through series of bogus entities (exit providers) maintained by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITAT Jaipur; CIT v. Nirav Modi (2017) 390 ITR 0292 (Bom). During the course of clarification on 18.10.2019, the attention of the Ld. counsel was drawn to the decision in Rampyari Devi Saraogi v. CIT (1968) 67 ITR 84 (SC). The Ld. counsel submits that the following facts in the above case do not exist in the case of the assessee : a. Enquiries made have revealed that assessee neither resided nor carried on any business from the address declared in the returns, whereas in the case of the present appellant, address and the description of the business has been correctly done and there are no discrepancies pointed out by the AO or the PCIT; b. The ITO was not justified in accepting the initial capital, the gift received and sale of jewellery, the income from business etc. without any inquiry or evidence whatsoever, whereas in the case of the present appellant proper inquiry was made by issuing notice u/s 142(1) and adequate evidences were produced where the relevant details in response to the same were submitted during the original assessment proceedings; c. The name of the assessee is Rampyari Devi Saraogi and as the Income Tax Officer, D Ward, Howrah, who has made the assessme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nn.com 305 (Kolkata-Trib). Referring to page 21, 22 and 23 of the Paper Book, the Ld. DR submits that no inquiry has been done by the AO in the instant case. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below. At this moment, we discuss the case laws relied on by both sides. We begin with the cases relied on by the Ld. counsel. In the case of Narayan Tatu Rane (supra), information was received from Bangalore Office of the Income Tax Department that they had carried out search and seizure operations in the case of R.N.S. and during the course of the search, certain documents indicating payments made to persons holding public office were seized. One of the said documents contained certain payment details under the heading 'Rane CM'. Based on this information, the AO reopened the assessment of the assessee of both the years under consideration by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act. The AO had asked the assessee to clarify about the impugned incriminating document and also to give explanations as to why the amounts mentioned therein should not be added back to the total income of the assessee. In respons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one equity share of Rs. 1/- each in the swap ratio of 1:1. Reference was made to the allotment of shares as communicated by M/s Luminaire Technologies Ltd. vide letter dated 04.09.2012. Accordingly, the assessee was allotted 5 lacs equity share of Rs. 1/- each of M/s Luminaire Technologies Ltd. which is credit in the demat account of the assessee. These shares were sold by the assessee between period 01.11.2012 to 14.12.2012 as per contract notes for a consideration of Rs. 2,12,34,671/-. The sale proceeds were credited in the bank account of the assessee. Considering the fact that the assessee had produced all evidence to prove the transactions of purchase of shares, payment of purchase consideration, amalgamation and merger of the companies subsequent to the purchase of shares, allotment of shares of the merged entity, dematerialization of in the demat account and subsequent sale of shares from the demat account of the assessee, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. In Nirav Modi (supra), it is held : "12. In the present facts, the Assessing Officer was satisfied, consequent to making an enquiry and examining the evidence produced by the Assessing Officer, est....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any evidence to prove genuineness of gift, commissioner had rightly set aside the assessment. In the case of Anuj Jayendra Shah (supra), assessee had made investment in mutual funds which was stated to be made out of gift received from maternal uncle. Assessee filed an affidavit executed by his maternal uncle stating that he had made such gift to the assessee out of natural law. The AO accepted said gift and completed assessment without making an addition. Thereafter, the Commissioner initiated proceedings u/s 263 on the ground that the AO had not examined gift with regard to identity, genuineness or creditworthiness of donor. The Tribunal held that as the Assessing Officer had not made an inquiry or verification before accepting gift received by the assessee and merely accepted submission of assessee, Commissioner had rightly invoked provisions of section 263 of the Act. In the case of Bisakha Sales (P.) Ltd. (supra), during the AY 2008-09, the assessee-company received share application money with huge and unjustified share premium from corporate entities. The AO passed an assessment order accepting the genuineness of deposits received by the assessee. The Commissioner, howeve....