TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 326
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of Income Tax(Appeal)-6, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2014-15. Since the issues raised in these three appeal are identical, we are extracting the ground of appeal raised in ITA No.131/Ahd/2024 for the purpose of adjudication. The decision in the said appeal will applicable to other two appeals also. ITA No.452/Ahd/2018 for AY 2014-15 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Each ground of appeal is separate and without prejudice to each other 1 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - VI erred in law and on facts in passing appeal order without adjudicating and thus ov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case of SumtiDaya vs. CIT (1995) 80 TAXMANN 89 (SC) as the facts in that case was quite different from the case of appellant. 7. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - VI erred in law and on facts in confirming the initiating the penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) of Act. 8. The submissions made by the appellant before the Ld Assessing Officer/CIT(A)-VI has not properly appreciated leading to erroneous conclusion 9. The order passed by the LdCIT(A)-VI is bad in law and against the facts of the case and judicial pronouncement. 10. The appellant crave and reserve his right to add, to modify, to alter and/or to withdraw any or all grounds of appeals. 3. The assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2015, declaring total inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Since there was no upward movement in long time the assessee sold the shares in December 2013 and January 2014, thereby claiming the Long term capital gain. After taking cognizance of assessee's reply and details, the AO observed that the assessee purchased 75,000 shares of the said company for consideration of Rs. 13,50,000/- about which no specific or vital information was available in the public domain and thus it was pre-arranged to provide accommodation entry. The AO further observed that in the instant price of M/s.Comfort Fincap Ltd. the price rose for a certain period of time and reached as higher as Rs. 448/- per share when the company itself is not constantly active or engaged in any business ventures. The AO has also cited the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that assuming without admitting that scrip in question was used by accommodation entry providers for providing entries in the form of bogus LTCG, then also LTCG earned by the assessee cannot be treated as bogus as there was no evidence to prove that there was any live nexus between the assessee and entry provider or company in question or its directors. There is nothing on record to even remotely demonstrate that assessee has paid any cash to the buyer, broker or any other entry provider for taking entry in form of LTCG. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO has taxed only LTCG which implies that the AO has allowed deduction of cost of acquisition from the total sale consideration of shares. The Ld.AR further submitted that suspension o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Order (show-cause notice dated 06.12.2016). The Ld.DR relied upon the Assessment Order and order of the Ld.CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of details of offline purchase of the scrip of M/s Comfort Fincap Ltd., it can be seen that the dematerialization of the said scrip was in January, 2011. The payment was made through banking channel. The shares were held for more than one year (33 months) and sold on the floor of recognized stock exchange. It is an undisputed fact that the Security Transaction Tax (STT) was duly paid. The details of dematerialization request form, letter with respect to allotment of shares, shares certificate, ledger of Parasnath Textile Ltd., ban....