2025 (9) TMI 1010

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... only being narrated as hereunder. ITA No. 6043/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed in Appeal no. CIT (A) 52, Mumbai/10419/2014-15 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] u/s. 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2015-16, wherein learned CIT(A) has partly allowed assessee's appeal. 2. The brief facts under appeal state that the respondent assessee company is an NBFC entity, which is engaged in the business of investment, trading and power generation. Assessee filed its return of income on 30.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amount of Rs. 2,39,93,359/- and sold the same @ Rs. 2,38,62,516/-, hence short term capital loss was treated as bogus and the purchase cost of Rs. 2,39,93,359/- and the commission expense amounting to Rs. 4,79,867/-, being 2% of purchase cost was added u/s. 69C of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act were also initiated against the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal against the assessment order dated 27.03.2022 before learned CIT(A), who deleted the aforesaid additions made by learned assessing officer. 4. Appellant revenue has raised the following grounds in this appeal: "1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) err....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee was duped and rigged and was a victim of financial fraud. Assessee filed a police complaint in the D.B. Marg police station Mumbai on 03.06.2016. Learned AR thus submits that learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the said additions and prayed to dismiss revenue's appeal. 9. We have carefully gone through the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed by learned CIT(A) and the material on record. The relevant paras 6 to 7.4 of the impugned order passed by learned CIT(A) are reproduced as under: " 6. In the above background and after considering the entire material on record, the appeal is proceeded to be decided. 7. Points nos. a to j of Ground No. 1: The issue in these points relates to the additions made by the AO u/s. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the first of the complaints to the Senior Police Inspector, D.B. Marg Police Station, Mumbai was filed dated 03.06.2016 with receipt stamp of 27.12.2016, Thus, this was much before the search action in the case of M/s PMC Fincorp Group. The complaint letter includes the name of the appellant as an affected party. Subsequent complaints have also been filed before the police including dated 19.10.2018. Given this set of facts, I am of the view that an addition u/s. 69C for unexplained expenditure is not warranted in the case of the appellant. It is a fact that the sum of Rs. 2,39,93,359/- represents the purchase cost. No evidence has been brought out by the AO that such expenditure has been incurred outside the regular books of accounts. C....