TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tial questions of law:- SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW (a) Whether the Tribunal was right in passing an order after more than 10 months of concluding the hearing? (b) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in dismissing the appeal without considering /dealing with any of arguments urged by the Appellant? (c) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the purchase as well as the sale of shares of Trends Pharma Pvt. Ltd., was a colourable device adopted by the Assessee in order to avoid tax? 3. However, the learned counsel for the appellant did not advance arguments on question (a) at the time of the hearing; therefore, it is presumed that he is not pressing for the same. We now propose to deal with questions (b) and (c). 4. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....findings of both the authorities i.e. the assessing officer and Commissioner (Appeals) and agreed with the findings of both the authorities that the transaction of sale and purchase of shares was a colourable device adopted by appellant-assessee to generate loss and to avoid tax. The Tribunal refused to interfere after giving the findings on the transaction being a sham transaction. 7. Mr. Thakkar, learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently objected to the findings of the three authorities and submitted that even if this transaction would not have been entered into but loan would have been given, still he would have been entitled to claim the deduction since in pricing same would have been factored. He submitted that the three authoriti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er (Appeals) also has reproduced the submissions of the appellant assessee in paragraph 3.2 of his order and, after evaluating the same, has given a detailed reasoning in paragraph 3.3 for confirming the findings of the assessing officer that the transaction is a sham transaction. The Tribunal, in its order after hearing the parties, has confirmed the said findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and by relying not only on the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) but also by giving independent findings in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 and has confirmed the transaction as sham transaction. 11. In light of the above, we do not agree that all three authorities have not considered the submissions made by the appellant assessee. In any case, question ....