TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : On the basis of search and seizure operations conducted on 03.10.2013 u/s 132 of the Act in Jakson Group of companies, statement of assessee was recorded and consequently proceedings u/s 153A were initiated. In response to the notice issued u/s 143A, assessee filed return of income on 05.01.2015 at the income of Rs. 3,91,84,350/- same as declared in the return income. Assessing Officer noticed that assessee along with M/s. Jakson Group namely Sh. Sameer Gupta, Sh. Bhawana Gupta and Smt. Anita Gupta has huge capital gains from the sale of shares and have claimed exempt income on the same. AO observed that the assessee adopted a modus operandi by claiming bogus LTCG by pre arranged trading in shares of various nondescript listed company aiming at availing income tax exempt as long term capital gain. Declining the contention raised by the assessee, AO proceeded to made addition of Rs. 9,78,54,242/- by way of disallowance of long term capital gain claimed as exempt income. 3. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs cannot be sustained and I have quashed the re-assessment order in those cases. The facts of the matter in this case in both the years are the same/similar and therefore reiying on my order in the case of Sh. Sameer Gupta (supra) I hold similarly injhese two appeals as well. 4.3 The facts of the matter taken in ground no. 08 relating to addition of Rs. 4,56,37,110/- and Rs. 9,78,54,242/- u/s 68 in the AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively on account of gain on sale of shares are also similar to that of the case of Sh. Sameer Gupta for AYs 2011-12 & 2012-13 (supra) considered at paras-4.5 to 4.5.4 therein. During the appellate proceedings the appellant was asked to submit a detailed statement in excel sheet of the date-wise purchase and sale of these shares alongwith the rate of purchase and sale as also the payment details with copy of the bank statement. The same have been submitted with WS for AY 2011-12 at pages-139-140 and pages-176-179 for AY 2012-13 of the respected PBs filed with WS on 23.11.2016 which are enclosed as Annx.1 and Annx. 2 to this order. On perusal of these details it is observed that the shares of the two companies were purchased at the same rate at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... read with section 143(3). 9. Coordinate bench of Tribunal while deciding case of Sameer Gupta, son of assessee arisen out of same search proceedings and key person of M/s. Jakson Group decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee by returning following findings : ""24. We have considered the rival arguments made hy both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the assessee in the instant case has filed his original return of income on 30th March, 2012 declaring total income of Rs. 3,92,11,220/-. In response to notice u/s 153A of the IT Act, the assessee filed return in response to notice u/s 153A on 5th January, 2015 declaring the same income. The assessee in his return of income had claimed exemption of long term capital gain of Rs. 5,62,61,726/-. The assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) read with section 153A by making addition of the long term capital gain as bogus. From the order of the assessing officer, we find nowhere it is mentioned that any incriminating material was found during the cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the course of search in the case of completed assessments, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 27. We further find the revenue has not challenged the vital legal ground on which the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition. Since the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has clearly held that addition in order passed u/s 143(3)/ 153A cannot be made In absence of any incriminating material and since in the instant case, there is no evidence whatsoever on record that any incriminating material was found during the course of search and since the addition was made on the basis of certain inquiries conducted subsequent to the search on the basis of return already filed, therefore, on this issue itself addition has to be deleted. We, therefore, uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the revenue." 10. Revenue has challenged the order passed by the Tribunal in case of Sameer Gupta before Hon'ble Delhi High Court but their appeal has been dismissed by Hon'ble High Court by returning following findings :- "In this....