TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1655
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pts- Addition of Rs. 33,807/-: The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 33,807/- under professional receipts without proper appreciation of facts and submissions made by the appellant. The addition is arbitrary and lacks any cogent evidence, contrary to the principles laid down in CIT v. Shiv Prakash Janak Raj & Co. Put. Ltd. [1996] 222 ITR 583 (SC), which emphasizes that additions cannot be made merely on presumptions and conjectures. 3. Capital Gain - Treatment as Short-Term Instead of Long-Term: The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 99,80,630/- as short-term capital gain instead of long-term capital gain, without considering the holding period and documentary evidence provided. 4. Disallowance of Long-Term Capital Loss Rs. 48,517/-: The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of long-term capital loss of Rs. 48,517/-. 5. Unexplained Money - Addition of Rs. 33,00,000/-: The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 33,00,000/- as unexplained money without proper appreciation of the factual situation and the explanations submitted by the appellant. This addition is against the law laid down ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act. Thus, here also the expenditure incurred to derive the professional income have to be allowed as expenditure. In view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any merit in the finding of the lower authorities. Hence, the addition of Rs. 33,087 is hereby deleted. The appellant assessee gets the consequential relief. 5. The next issue is in respect of taxability of short-term capital gain of Rs. 99,80,630/- and the disallowance of long-term capital loss of Rs. (-) 48,517/-. The relevant facts are that the assessee has booked a flat in DLF Home Developers Ltd. on 06.02.2007 as per Apartment Buyer Agreement dated 27.08.2007 and made payments as per the details given hereunder: - Receipt No. Date Amount 138589X302138 06/02/2007 Rs. 15,00,000.00 142558X306312 16/04/2007 Rs. 10,57,500.00 148187X312238 03/07/2007 Rs. 9,59,063.00 PPI7CRVB/0004/0707 03/07/2008 Rs. 9,59,062.00 PPL/CRVB/0062/0908 18/09/2008 Rs. 7,59,063.00 PPIVCRVB/0080/0908 19/09/2008 Rs. 2,00,000.00 PPIVCRVB/0095/1108 18/11/2008 Rs. 6,86,313.00 PPL/CRVB/0174/1108 24/11/2008 Rs. 2,72,136.00 PPIVCRVB/0179/1208 26/12/2008 Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeks, which makes the possession of the flat ready by April, 2012. Assessee has not furnished any evidence regarding treatment of the capital asset. From documents placed on records of the asset, it is evidens that the possession was made by April, 2012. Further, assessee has contended that the DLF had not given possession of Flat till sale of right and assessee in the relevant F.Y. 2014-15 has sold the right & not the flat. Hence, there was no possession letter. However, from the documents & submissions by the assessee placed on record, it is evident that the possession is to be given by April, 2012. Further, once the flat was to be handed over by six weeks, it is not practically possible that the flat was not handed over to the assessee in 02 years. 44. In light of facts & circumstances of the case, the benefit of indexation cannot be given & asset transferred has to be considered as Short Term (due to period of holding). Possession date is considered as 11.04.2012 (6 weeks from 27.02.2012). Property was sold by assessee on 15.05.2014. So period of holding is taken as 25 months 3 days. Hence, it is a short term capital asset. Hence, transaction is Short Term Capital Gain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al stocks. These loses were reversed with the same counterparties either on the same day or the next day. On perusal of the details, the assessee Sh. Pramod Agarwal has been identified who has booked fictitious losses by trading in illiquid derivatives on BSEAISE during the F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to the A.Y. 2015-16. The value of total fictitious losses is Rs. 32,01,2501- which has been booked by the assessee for tax evasion. However, the appellant deliberately withheld the information from the Assessing Officer as well as appellate proceeding which is within exclusive knowledge of appellant to establish the genuineness of transactions of purchase of shares. It is nothing but a fraud played by the appellant against the Assessing Officer who is quasi-judicial authorities employed for execution of the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the principle of fraud can be squarely applied to the facts of the present case and principles of natural justice have no application. Applying the said doctrine, I have no hesitation to hold that the transaction of purchase and sale of shares of trading commodities under consideration is void ab-initio, this is nothing but sham, make....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hts in or in relation to an Indian company, including rights of management or control or any other rights whatsoever. It has been judicially held that a property is a bundle of rights which the owner can lawfully exercise to the exclusion of all others and is entitled to use and enjoy as he pleases provided, he does not infringe any law of the State. It can be either corporeal or incorporeal. Once something is determined as property it becomes a capital asset unless it figures in the exceptions mentioned in sub-clauses (i) to (vi) or the Capital Gains is specifically exempted. 6.3 The Ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions: - * Shri Keyur Hemant Shah (ITA No. 6710/Mum/ 2017 * Praveen Gupta (137 TTJ307) (ITAT Delhi) * Laxmi Devi Ratani (2005) 198 CTR (MP) 336 * Tata Services Ltd. 122 ITR 594 * Vijay Flexible Containers 186 ITR 693 (Bom.) * Mormasji Man Charji Vaid 168 CTR (Guj.) (FB) 565 * Arundhati Balkrishna (1982) 29 CTR (Guj.) 85 * Vembu Vaidyanathan (ITA No. 1459 of 2016) dated 22/1/2019 * Girish C Bhatia (2008) 113 TTJ 521 * Vimal Lal Chand Mutha 187 ITR 613 7 The Ld. Sr.....