TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.7,15,679/- ignoring the fact that the stock prices of the companies are manipulated to provide the exempted long term capital gain. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim ignoring the judicial pronouncement by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell Vs. CTO wherein it was held that "Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious method. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay the taxes honestly without resorting to subterfuges." 4. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. It is therefore prayed that the order of ld. CIT(A) may kindly be set aside that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....short) paid on the said transaction. The assessee again submitted that all details including D-mat account along with reply dated 05.09.2018. The assessee submitted that he earned Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on sale of such shares of Rs.3,31,781/- and Short Term Capital Loss (STCL) of Rs.14,218/-. The assessee submitted that some shares were wrongly sold through assessee's account, which was never purchased by assessee and entry of debit and credit were done on the same day. There was no sale and purchase of share other than explained by assessee. The assessee reiterated that Assessing Officer considered the sale entry twice including one which is reversed on the same date. The assessee explained that he made transaction of sale of shares in the legitimate manner and paid STT. The shares purchased through recognized Stock Exchange. The assessee also requested to supply copy of notice served under section 148, if it was served within time limit. The assessee also relied upon on various case laws. 4. The reply of assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer held that he was having information that scrip of Global Capital Markets Ltd. is used for gen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hased 4000 shares of scrip at an average price of Rs.5.39 per share and which were brought in D- mat form and kept in assessee's D-mat account with Surat People's Co-operative Bank Ltd. having BPID IN300845. The assessee furnished contract note, broker note and D-mat account with regard to STT was paid on the transaction. The assessee explained that shares were sold on 23.09.2010 through BSC at an average price of Rs.88.34/- per share and received Rs.3,31,781/-. The assessee furnished complete details of contract note from broker's ledger, D-mat account and bank statement. The assessee thus tried to prove the bona fide of nature and source of sum credit in his books though the explanation provided by assessee has not been considered by Assessing Officer. The NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) complied the Assessing Officer's reasons for making addition and his remarked regarding adjudication of issue in question and held that Assessing Officer has not confronted with any statement or relevant part of material to the assessee, which was violated the principle of natural justice. The Assessing Officer has not brought any material on record regarding turnover or profit or net worth of Gl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r-DR for the Revenue relied upon on the following decision: * Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Swati Bajaj: [2022] 139 taxmann.com 352 (Calcutta)/[2022] 288 Taxman 403 (Calcutta)/[2022] 46 ITR 56 (Cal)[14-06-2022] * Sangeeta Devi Jhunjhunwala vs. ITO Ward-70(1) New Delhi ITA No.747/Del/2022 dated 18.05.2023 8. Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue submits that though the tax effect in the present appeal is less than the monetary limit of tax effect as per Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Tax, however, decision is not accepted by Assessing Officer as well as Range Head and the case is being a "penny stock" is covered by exception in para-10(c) of CBDT's Circular No.3/2018 : dated 20.08.2018. 9. On the other hand, Ld. AR for the assessee supported the order of NFAC/Ld. CIT(A). Ld. AR for the assessee submits that present tax appeal is not maintainable and the tax effect involved in the present appeal is very meagre, the Revenue itself has mentioned tax effect of Rs.2,14,267/-. Even otherwise, the case does not fall under exceptional clause as relied by Ld. Sr-DR of clause-10(c) of CBDT's Circular No.3/2018 dated 20.08.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Mahabir Maheshka ITA No.6168- 6169/Mum/2019 dated 27.07.2023 11. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sanjay Mahabir Maheshka (supra) considered the similar scrip of M/s. Global Capital market Ltd., which was sold @ Rs.63/- per share on 08.09.2009 and accepted the transaction by taking view that LTCG declared by assessee cannot be doubted. The ld AR for the assessee finally submits that the assessee is liable to succeed on the issue of tax effect being less than the monitory limit as well as on merit as well. 12. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities. I have also deliberated on the various case laws relied by the parties. I find that the assessing officer made addition of Rs. 7,15,679/- solely on the basis of information available with him. Neither the source of such information is recorded in his assessment order nor such information was shared with the assessee. The assessee in his reply, specifically mentioned that Assessing Officer considered the sale entry twice including one which is reversed on the same date. Even such fact was not examined by assessing o....