2025 (8) TMI 1680

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ver by ignoring the statement recorded on oath in which it was admitted that commission was @2%. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 26.09.2015 declaring total income at Rs. 3,37,860/-, which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 08.12.2015. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 24.03.2021 after the approval of the competent authority. A survey action u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted on 03.12.2019 by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai on the assessee. During the course of investigation, it was found that the syndicate of share brokers and entry operators were providing accommodation entries of bogus profit/loss to various entities, in lieu of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eived by the AO from the Investigation wing. Mumbai that the assessee was involved in providing accommodation entry to the beneficiaries in the form of awarding bogus LTCG or Bogus trading loss in synchronized trading through equity options segment in BSE in lieu of commission. On account of the said fact, the investigation wing. Mumbai conducted a survey under Section 133A of the Act on the office premises of the assessee on 03.12.2019. On the same date similar surveys were also conducted upon several other stock brokers. 6.2.2. It is observed that at the time of the said survey, the statement of one Mr Sanjay Bansal, the director of the appellant company, was recorded u/s 131 of the Act. In the statements recorded, Shri Bansal and Shri.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the remand report, alleging that the AO did not address the explanations provided in the appellant's submissions. Instead, the AO reached a conclusion in a generalized manner, asserting that the addition was made based on the facts of the case, without addressing the specific details presented. 6.2.4. The appellant in the rejoinder to the remand report also stated that if the AO wants to make addition based on the statement recorded during the survey, then the same should not be made fully as per the statement. However, in the recorded statement, Mr. Bansal had stated that they used to earn commission at the range of 0.05% to 0.15%. Relevant portion of the statement is reproduced as under: "Q.23 Please state how much commission was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... pointed out names of key persons who obtained clients from him with regard to bogus trades. That the Assessing Officer has accepted every part of the statement of Shri Arun Shah recorded in survey action but ignored the statement, wherein, he had stated that the assessee had received commission income @ 0.1% only. 4. After hearing the rival submissions, we find that the order of the CIT(A) is well-reasoned and we do not find any reason to interfere with the same, in view of this, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed. 6.2.6. In view of the above judicial pronouncement as well as the discussion held the income is to be estimated @0.10% on the total turnover of the assessee of Rs. 392....