TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 504
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....various occasions in the past but except once there has been no representation on behalf of the assessee for the dates of hearing fixed on 24.09.2024, 29.01.2025, 12.03.2025, 19.03.2025 and 30.04.2025. We also observe that valid notices of hearing have been issued and served upon the assessee and only on one occasion, i.e. on 11.11.2024 Mr. Vinay Kawadia appeared through virtual mode. After 11.11.2024, case has been fixed for hearing for three times in the past but finally today since the assessee has neither appeared in person nor an Authorised Representative on his behalf, it seems that assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits with the assistance of ld. Departmental Repres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and the transactions are in relation to derivatives. Ld. AO thereafter made discussion about the Derivative Option Trading where there are two options, i.e. 'Call' and 'Put'. 'Call" option gives the right but not the obligation to buy a given quantity of the underlying asset at a given price on or before a given future date and 'Put' option is just inverse. Ld. AO has further examined the alleged fictitious loss transactions and then also referred to the proceedings carried out u/s. 133A of the Act for the survey conducted on the business premises of the broker Skung Tradelink Ltd. located at Kanpur - Mr. Nimish Kumar Somani, Director of Skung Tradelink Ltd. has stated in the statement that he provided the fictitious/arranged profit/loss th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act without appreciating the facts of the case and submissions on record. 4) The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal." 5. There is no representation on behalf of the assessee and only the grounds of appeal along with the impugned orders are available on record. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. So far as the legal issues raised in Ground Nos. 1 and 2 challenging the validity of the reopening of the assessment proceedings, we observe that ld.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment under consideration. In ground no.4 the appellant has raised the issue that the Assessing Officer has failed to follow the procedure laid down by Hon'ble Apex court and other courts that reasons for re-opening the assessment will be provided. However, I find that the appellant did not comply to the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021 as the return u/s 148 of the Act was not filed within the prescribed time of 30 days from the date of service of the notice. Further, the appellant filed a return on 24.02.2022 i.e. at the fag end of the limitation period of assessment. The appellant has submitted that he requested for issuing certified copy of reasons for reopening of the case but no evidence of the same has been furnished.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tice. Further, the assessee finally filed return of income on 24.02.2022 which was almost near the fag end of the limitation period and the assessee has also not furnished any documentary evidence to prove that assessee has applied for copy of reasons for reopening of the case before ld.CIT(A). Under these given facts and circumstances, all the legal issues raised by the assessee in Grounds of appeal No.1 and 2 are hereby dismissed. 9. Coming to the merits of the case as to whether assessee made a genuine claim of loss on trading of securities at Rs. 40,35,560/-, the claim of the assessee before the lower authorities is that the transactions/trading was done on BSE through banking channel and all charges/fees were paid to BSE and duly supp....