AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 588
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed from own other bank account were added as income in assessment order. These receipts should not be included in the income." 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee filed his e-ITR 05.08.2016 declaring a total income at Rs. 71,133/- and exempted income of Rs. 20,15,661/- for the year under consideration. Thereafter, the case selected for limited scrutiny assessment through Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) for the issue that "Whether the investment and income relating to securities transactions are duly disclosed." and notice u/s 143(2) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) issued on 16.08.2017 for 28.08.2017 duly served upon the assessee through his registered E-mail. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) of the Act issued on 21.07.2018 and 23.09.2018 for 06.08.2018 and 04.10.2018 respectively duly served upon the assessee through his registered E-mail. In response to those notices, the assessee did not comply with. Therefore, a summons u/s 131 of the Act issued on 29.10.2018 for 06.11.2018 duly served upon the assessee through his registered E-mail. Apropos to the issue raised before the relevant finding of the ld. AO is reiterated here ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9874280 to the tune of Rs. 12,68,656/- which are not part of receipts declared in his return of income and no explanation offered by the assessee. Therefore, the said receipts in aggregating of Rs.16,06,387/- are treated as unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act in his bank accounts and the same is hereby added to his total taxable income for the year under consideration." 4. The assessee feeling aggrieved filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) on the issue is reiterated here in below : "Ground No.-1: The contention of the appellant is that the receipts in the bank accounts are FD proceeds, reimbursement from employer and transfer from another bank account. The details provided by the appellant is looked into and it is known that the fixed deposits proceeds and reimbursement from employer are not disclosed in return of income which is the obligation of the appellant and he is failed in this. The claim of transfer from one bank account to another bank account is also not correct. On comparing the both banks account provided by the appellant it is found that there are no similar transactions and the appeal on this ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otal addition was made by the AO is Rs. 18,33,251/- and assessed total income of Rs. 18,33,250/-. 6. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the appellant filed appeal to the Ed. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 24.11.2018 and the Ld. CIT (Appeals) confirm the addition and give partial relief to allow deduction u/s 80C to the extent of investment amount available under section 80C in his order dated 26.10.2022. 7. Now the appellant filed an appeal before your honour against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and I submit my written submission before your good self. Submissions: 8. The World Health Organization often organizes medical camps and meetings for smoothly functioning its objectives regarding medical facility improvement in the country. The appellant as employee of the WHO, visited various places throughout the country for joining and engaging in those activities. For the very purpose, the appellant spent money for travelling and stay in hotel and other expenses. The employer transferred the money to the appellant's Axis Bank account no. 911010009396867 to reimburse the expenses. Total amount of reimbursement of expenses received in the bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erson of WHO. He could not indulge in another business. Therefore, the transactions in stock market should be treated as investing activities rather than business activities. Hence, the addition of Rs. 2,26,864/- as business income should be deleted. Statement of Share transactions are attached herewith. Therefore it is very humbly prayed that kindly delete the addition and allow the appeal of the appellant and obliged." 6. The ld DR is heard who has relied on the findings of the lower authorities. The ld. DR also submitted the looking to the nature of frequent transaction done by the assessee the ld. AO has rightly assessed the income of the assessee. The details which the ld. AR of the assessee so filed are not filed on the records of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. It is not in dispute that the primary income of the assessee is under the head salary. It is also not in dispute that the assessee is working under World Health Organization. The only dispute that based on the facts on record whether the investing activity done by the assessee is business receipts or it falls under the head Capital....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#39;) has also, through Instruction No. 1827, dated August 31, 1989 and Circular No. 4 of 2007 dated June 15, 2007, summarized the said principles for guidance of the field formations. 3. Disputes, however, continue to exist on the application of these principles to the facts of an individual case since the taxpayers find it difficult to prove the intention in acquiring such shares/securities. In this background, while recognizing that no universal principal in absolute terms can be laid down to decide the character of income from sale of shares and securities (i.e. whether the same is in the nature of capital gain or business income), CBDT realizing that major part of 26 IT(IT)A No. 02, 04/JP/2018 CO No. 41/JP/2018 &IT(IT) A No. 12/JP/2019 Arun Nagar shares/securities transactions takes place in respect of the listed ones and with a view to reduce litigation and uncertainty in the matter, in partial modification to the aforesaid Circulars, further instructs that the Assessing Officers in holding whether the surplus generated from sale of listed shares or other securities would be treated as Capital Gain or Business Income, shall take into account the following - ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bank account is concerned the first amount of Rs. 12,68,656/- is the amount of maturity amount of his fixed deposits made in Oriental Bank of Commerce in his SBI bank account no. 30469874280 dated 17-06-2015 for an amount of Rs. 8,22,488/- and dated 12-02-2016 for an amount of Rs. 4,46,168/- totaling to Rs. 12,68,656/- not only that the receipt if any cannot be so odd and therefore, the view taken by the ld. AO is incorrect. The second receipt is for an Rs. 3,37,731/- the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the various vouchers of reimbursement received by him from his employer being the amount of the reimbursement of expenditure amount received by the assessee [vouchers (APB-15-33) ] and summary at page 14 as extracted here in below: Based on same these set of evidence we observed that the same is not taxable receipts and therefore ld. AO has incorrectly disallowed it. The ld. DR not contended to these averments on facts but at the same time ld. SR. DR submitted that so far these contentions were not raised or submitted before the lower authorities, needs verification on the part of the ld. AO. She further submitted that let these receipt be verified by the ld. AO and if found i....