TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1415
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aded is penny stock used for providing accommodation entry only in form of bogus LTCG and STCG and shared with the jurisdiction AO in the FY 2020-21. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is right in deleting the addition made on account of penny stock transaction without appreciating the facts that the assessee has entered into penny stock transaction, which is arranged transaction, which involve the series of preconceived steps and lack of commercial content and totally an artificially structured transaction entered into with the sole intent to evade taxes. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is right in deleting the addition made on account of penny stock transaction without appreciating the facts that the action of the AO was based on analysis of information received from investigation wing of the department which is a premier institution. 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is right in application of judgment of GKN Driveshaft in the case of the assessee as the assessee has not filed her valid return of income in prescribed time limit. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. During the course of assessment the assessee has brought to the notice of the assessing officer that information and details regarding share transaction on which exemption u/s 10(38) was claimed had already been submitted at the time of original assessment made u/s 143(3). However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and stated that at the time of original assessment proceedings new facts pertaining to bogus accommodation entries of purchase and sale of shares were not available. Therefore, the AO has treated the claim of exemption u/s 10(38) from LTCG a fictitious and disallowed the claim of exemption. 3. The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment is bad in law and not valid, after referring the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dated 30.12.2016 wherein various document and submission called for were submitted during the assessment proceedings. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the ld. D.R supported the order of assessing officer. 5. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel filed paper book comprising copies of various document filed before the assessing officer during the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions raised are obligations of the AO in a reopened assessment, before going ahead with passing of reassessment order. The AO cannot disobey the direction of the Supreme Court, which is law of the land and binding AO cannot use his discretion to curtail the rights of the tax payer granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court by bringing in any arbitrary condition of his own. The AO supplied the reasons recorded to the assessee after seeing the return in the ITBA and the assessee filed her objections. As per the procedure, there was no need of any further opportunity required to be given to the assessee before passing the order disposing the objections raised. He could have passed an order disposing of objections complying with the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court. Further, it is seen that there was sufficient time before the AO after filing of objections by the assessee and before passing final order on 28.03.2022. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that there is a violation of jurisdiction by the AO." 8. The ld. CIT(A) has also referred the various submission made by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act in response to the notices i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... quashed, hence these grounds are not adjudicated. 8. Grounds of appeal 9 and 10 are general in nature does not require any adjudication. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed." 9. As per copy of notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act by the assessing officer on 31.08.2016 at serial no. 2 assessing officer has asked the assessee to produce detail of share transaction and capital gains. As per copy of notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act on 30.11.2016 wherein at serial no. 2 to 7 various detail pertaining to the long term capital gain claimed as exempt was asked. The relevant detail asked by the assessing officer are as under: "1. Please state whether you have dealt in to purchase or sale of shares of listed companies during the AY2014-15 2. Please state whether Short Term Capital Gain (STCG)/ Long term Capital Gain (LTCG)/ Short Term Capital Loss (STCL) is claimed in the return of income filed. 3. Please state whether the LTCG is claimed exempt u/s 10(38) of the act. 4. Please furnish details of shares purchased & sold in which LTCG or STCL claimed during the AY2014-15 5. Please furnish the details of demat account & Provide copy of demat account for relevant period in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case of the assessee was bad in law. 12. The assessing officer has issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2021 asking the assessee to file profit and loss account and balance sheet and computation of income for the year under consideration. In response the assessee vide letter dated 19.12.2021 requested the assessing officer to provide the copy of reason recorded and escaped income requiring reassessment of the income of the assessee. However, without providing any copy of reason recorded the assessing officer has issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on 15.12.2021 calling various details including the detail pertaining to the purchase and sale shares. The assessing officer has again issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on 02.12.2022 about the detail of transaction pertaining to the sale and purchase of shares on which assessee has shown exempt income. The assessee has filed her reply vide letter dated 09.12.2022 and requested the assessing officer to furnish the copy of reason recorded and also requested the assessing officer to dispose the objection filed by the assessee as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft Vs. ITO (259 ITR 19). 13. The a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... During the course of original assessment proceedings the assessee has made compliance with all the queries and detail called by the assessing officer on the issue of long term capital gain claimed on the sale of shares of M/s Shree Shaleen Textiles Ltd. It is also undisputed fact that assessing officer has not disposed off the objection filed by the assessee in respect of reopening of the case as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft as mentioned supra. Therefore, we don't find error in the decision of ld. CIT(A) in holding that reassessment order in the case of the assessee was passed by the assessing officer without justification on account of non-disposal of the objection filed by the assessee. Further the assessee has demonstrated from the copies of various material as discussed supra in this order and in the finding of ld. CIT(A) that in the original assessment proceedings, the AO has specifically raised issue regarding information received from DIT(Investigation) Kolkata relating to claim of long term capital gains from operators and the AO has obtained the various explanation of the assessee and did not make any addition after raising the issu....