2022 (10) TMI 35

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reasons due Covid-19 Pandemic and the filling was delayed and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in respect of extension of period of limitation. We find the registry has issued defect notice to the assessee mentioning the delay of 541 days in filling the appeal. On application of the ratio of decision of the Honble Supreme court in respect of extension of limitation period the delay can be condoned and the Ld.DR has no specific objections. Further we are satisfied with the reasonable cause explained for delay in filling the appeal and accordingly we condone the delay and admit the appeal. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1..1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, order dated 05.03.2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 30.06.2017 merely arrived at the correct taxable income, a course permissible in law and hence such an order taking a legally permissible view could not have been revised. 1.3 Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. PCIT grossly erred in not appreciating that even otherwise, the purchase cost of shares (Rs.1,53,510/-) is deductible from the total sale value of shares (Rs.14,03,2507-) in order to arrive at the correct taxable income and in any case, the Ld. PCIT has not disputed the fact that the Assessee has actually spent the said amount and hence the assessment order sought to be revised is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and could not be revised. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d income and the entire sale proceeds should have been declared by the assessee underIDS2016 and the AO has not made any enquiry on these aspects With this observations the Pr,CIT was not satisfied with the order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act as it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and directed the AO to frame assessment de nova after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and passed the order under Section 263 of the Act dated 05.03.2021.Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Honble Tribunal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Ld.AR submitted that the Pr,CIT has erred in overlooking the facts that the order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs.32,86,815/-. In other words; the PCIT seeks to tax even the purchase cost of the shares i.e. Rs.1,43,185/- stating it to be a bogus purchase transaction. 5. After examining the documents on record we do not concur with the view of the PCIT. The assessee has demonstrated from the bank statement that the amount has been paid for purchase of shares of GCM Securities Ltd. through cheque. This is further corroborated by share application form of GCM Securities at page 22 of the Paper Book and transaction-cum-holding statement in the case of assessee issued by Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. at page 19 of the Paper Book. The documents furnished by the assessee clearly indicate that the shares were indeed purchased by the assessee thr....