TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner of Income Tax(Appeals), has erred on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,06,39.101 /- by not accepting the well accepted system of stock, wherein there is a pakka arthtia and other is stockiest . 4. That the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the evidence tendered by the appellant to support the claim of loss incurred and hence , findings recorded on borrowed inference in disregard of evidence and based on irrelevant and extraneous considerations are misconceived and, misplaced. 5. That the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the above addition and denied loss by not appreciating the detailed explanation of appellant and also documentary evidence furnished during assessment proceedings and therefore order so made is in disregard of principles of natural justice is vitiated. 6. That the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in treating the stock business as speculative loss by stating that that the goods were not purchased by the assesssee and no delivery of goods taken place, where as in stock business, it is very old and well accepted system of business that the goods....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e had claimed set off of commodity stock trading loss of Rs. 2,06,39,101/- against Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 2,80,71,062/- earned during the year. That the Assessing Officer(AO) had scrutinized this claim of loss of the assessee during the assessment proceedings and had denied the same noting that the assessee had not indulged in such transactions either in the preceding year or the succeeding year, that the scope of the company did not included trading in commodity, that the change in object had not been intimated to any authority, that no concrete document to support the rate of purchase and sale of commodities had been filed by the assessee and the assessee's explanation for selling the commodities at a loss on account of the same being infected was not believable. That accordingly the AO held that the assessee was not eligible to the loss on account of commodity trading and disallowed the same. The Ld.CIT(A),it was pointed out, upheld the order of the AO. The learned counsel for the assessee thereafter drew out attention to the order of the Ld.CIT(A) at page 9 and pointed out that the Ld.CIT(A) had noted that identical type of bogus loss had been claimed in another assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... transmitted by the assessee through RTGS, rate at which wheat was purchased. Commission, brokerage, labour charges, packaging etc. The assessing Officer did not call for any of the alleged "Pakka Arhtias"or entries from whom the wheat was purchased. He simply put a doubt on the basis of circumstances. First suspicion is that incidence of long term Capital gain occurred to the asseessee on 21.07.2014, and thereafter, the asseessee has booked purchase of wheat, its infestation and sale. The infestation has happened in all these seven godowns. This was not acceptable to the Assessing Officer. To our mind , it is one of strong circumstance and corroborative factors to disbelieve the claim of the assessee, but it is a just suspicion and it should have been cross-verified by the Assessing Officer before disbelieving it. He ought to have at least issued summons to these entities and to verify whether this activity was actually undertaken by the assessee or not. Suspicion however may be strong, but only on the basis of the suspicion claim of the assessee cannot be rejected. For buttressing the aspect, we would like to decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case referr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taken by pucca arhtias in the capacity of agent of the assessee is to be construed as actual delivery taken by the assessee and, therefore, it cannot be treated as speculative transaction. The learned counsel for the assessee thereafter took us through the facts of the present case and drawing our attention to the Paper Book filed before us pointed out that all details of the loss on stock had been filed to the AO in the form of copy of account of the same alongwith confirmed copy of account of all parties through whom the transaction had been undertaken and also documents evidencing consignment purchase and consignment sale of the stock. Our attention was drawn to the following documents filed at Book page Nos.4 to 34 as under: 1. Copy of Loss on Stock Account as per the books of accounts of the Assessee. 4 2. Copy of Confirmed Ledger Accounts as issued by M/s Sat Narain Gupta & Sons. 5 3. Copy of Confirmed Ledger Accounts, Consignment Purchase and Consignment sale documents as issued by M/s P.R traders 6-8 4. Copy of Confirmed Ledger Accounts, Consignment Purchase and Consignment sale documents as issued by M/s Kunj Bihari Food Sales India. ....