TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h, Kolkata in ITA No.874/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2014-15. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : A. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by setting aside the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax without appreciating that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue ? B. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law exemption cannot be allowed under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein entire transaction is colluded and bogus ? C. Whether the Learned Tribunal has commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Commissioner under Section 263 does not mention about how the assessments order was erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. These words or phrases are contained in Section 263 of the Act. Merely because the Commissioner has not used these words or phrases occurring in Section 263 will not vitiate the assumption of jurisdiction. What is required to be seen is the content of the order and the discussion and findings rendered by the Commissioner. This is because the cardinal principle is that substance over form has to be preferred. The Commissioner while issuing the show cause notice had come to the prima facie conclusion that the assessing officer did not conduct an enquiry as required to justify such prima fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nquiry by calling upon the assessee to explain and justify the genuineness of the claim for exemption made by them. If the assesses has not established the genuinity at the "other end" the assessing officer would have no other operation except making the addition under Section 68 of the Act. We find that in these cases the assessing officers missed an important point as to what is the nature of enquiry which he is required to do. The assessing officer merely went by the submission that the stock broker is a public sector company. Unfortunately this is not the manner in which the enquiry should have been conducted. The entire case before the department was the genuinity of the claim for LTCG/STCL and the basis was unhealthy and steep rise of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urrounding circumstances was required to be taken note of by the tribunal which exercise has not been done. We have considered as to whether in such an event, should the matter be remanded to the tribunal for fresh consideration. We have held that there is no such requirement and that is the Court is empowered to examine! the findings recorded by the assessing officer, or the CIT (A) to arrive at a conclusion. The assessees have been harping upon the opinion rendered by the financial experts, professionals in the said field the information which were available in the media etc. All these opinions are at best suggestions to an investor. The assessees cannot state that merely because an expert had issued a buy call or there was news in the me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilities to be the relevant factor as on account of the fact that the assessees are of individuals or Hindu Undivided Families and the trading has been done in the name of the individual assessee or by the Karta of the HUF. None of the assessee before us have been shown to big time investor. This is evident from the income details of the assessee which has been culled out by the respective assessing officers. Assuming that the assessee is a regular investor as was submitted to us by the learned advocates for the assessees that in any manner cannot improve the situation as the claim for LTCG has been only restricted to the shares which were purchased and sold by the assessees in penny stocks companies. Therefore merely because the assessee ha....