TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1567
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....further based on common set of facts, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 2. In all the three appeals, the assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Long term capital gains claimed by the assessee as exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') treating the sale of shares as bogus in nature. 3. The facts relating to the above said issue are discussed in brief. The AO received information that the assessee has sold shares of a company named M/s. Excel Castronics Limited during the three years under consideration and earned long term capital gains, which was claimed to be exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. The Inves....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns and hence the assessee has filed these three appeals. 4. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has purchased One lakh shares of Rs.10/- each of M/s Excel Castronics Ltd on 01-02-2012 from the company itself by paying consideration of Rs.10.00 lakhs through banking channels. He submitted that all these shares were sold through stock exchange platform during the years relevant to AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17. He submitted that there was stock split on 21-11-2014, i.e., face value of shares was reduced from Rs.10/- to Rs.2/- per share and hence, the assessee received additional shares. The Ld A.R explained the details of availability of shares as under:- Initial purchase of shares shares 1,00,000 Sold during the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e contrary, the Ld D.R submitted that the Investigation Wing has found that the share prices of M/s Excel Castronics Ltd has been rigged, which is proved by the fact that the shares prices were not commensurate with the fundamentals of the company. The astronomical rise in the prices is beyond the preponderance of human probability. In this regard, the Ld.CIT(A) has placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Kolkatta High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Swati Bajaj (IA No.GA/2/2022)(ITAT No.06 of 2022). Accordingly, he contended that the orders passed by Ld.CIT(A) do not call for any interference. 7. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R submitted that the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court would state that it is required ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ual date of allotment of shares to her. In the absence of evidence for allotment of shares to the assessee, it would be difficult to identify the date of purchase of shares. Thus, we notice that the assessee has failed to prove the date of purchase of shares. 9. We noticed that the assessee has furnished copies of Demat statement and in that statement, the shares of above said company are shown. The said statement only gives the date on which the physical shares were dematerialized. It will not show the date of allotment of shares. One thing that can be accepted is that the dematerialization of shares shall take place only when physical shares were surrendered to the bank/broker for getting it dematerialized, meaning thereby, the assesse....