AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 146
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 24.08.2023. 1.1. Since the issues raised in both these appeals are common and pertain to the same assessee, these are heard together and are disposed off by way of this common order for the sake convenience and brevity. 1.2. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that assessee being an individual filed his return of income for the AY 2013-14 on 31.03.2014 at a total income of Rs. 38,64,475/- and for the AY 2014-15 on 23.03.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 24,71,830/-. A notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued for trading in shares of Indian Infotech & Software Ltd. during the year which has been identified as a bogus company indulging in giving long-term capital gain/short-term capital loss to its beneficiaries and the transacti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... BSE shares. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the new article dated 19.11.2022 published on 'livemint.com'. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that purchase and sale transaction of the shares are made through broker Kotak Securities Ltd. duly registered with the Stock Exchange of India and the shares were received by the appellant assessee in his Demat account and also delivered through Demat account maintained with the depositor. Further submission of ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the assessee is a genuine and regular investor and he has sold the shares through the mechanism of the recognized stock exchange. The ld. Counsel for the assessee cited following decisions: i) PCIT vs. Sangitaben Jagdishkumar Shah reporte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....air advantage was caused to any shareholder or investor. 8. Admittedly, a clear finding has been given by AO that there is no misappropriation of funds of the Company nor there is any manipulation in the price of the scrip. 10. We find that no disproportionate gain was caused to anyone nor created any unfair advantage to the appellants nor any specific loss was caused to any investors and, therefore, in our opinion the direction for imposition of penally appears to be harsh and excessive." 2.1. It admits of no doubt that SEBI is the sole authority regulating the share trading and, in its order, SEBI has held that M/s. India Infotech and Software Ltd. is not a shell company that the company was not involved in any manipulation in the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocuments such as contract note of transactions from broker, copy of trading bills, details of STT paid, and further, all transactions were through banking channels, impugned addition made on account of said loss treating same as bogus could not be sustained That on the identical issue. SLP filed by the revenue department has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT Vs Genuine Finance Pvt Ltd 464 1TR 588 (SC) (13/05/2024). Lastly, reliance is placed upon the decision of Coordinated Bench in the case of M/s Gateway Financial Services Ltd & Others Vs ACIT in ITA No. 982- 984/Kol/2018 order dated 14/07/2023 wherein on similar facts, differentiating the issue it has been concluded as below:- 44......... Secondly, there ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice issued to them. Therefore, when the assessee(s) have been exonerated and the charges against them have been waived and the transactions of purchase and sale of equity shares carried out by them have been found to be genuine, the theory of preponderance of probabilities is ruled out in the case of the present assessee(s). Thus, when the transactions giving rise to the long term capital gain have been found to be genuine, and as per rules and regulation of SEBI, the finding of the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and the impugned additions in case of assessee(s) in appeal before us are uncalled for." 2.3. Going over the above discussion, we find that the following facts have been arisen from the arguments and the facts of the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that he dismissed the appeal of the assessee there by saying that the assessee failed to discharge his onus regarding proving of genuineness of the transaction which has led to alleged long-term capital gain. It is apparent that the assessee has brought order of the SEBI before the AO and ld. CIT(A) regarding the genuineness of M/s. India Infotech and Software Ltd. as held by SEBI and further assessee had proved that transactions of the shares are duly recorded in the statement of account of the assessee. There was nothing before the AO to establish any collision with any of the person involved in the manipulation of the price of share of M/s. India Infotech and Software Ltd. How the AO and ld. CIT(A) come to this conclusion that the asses....