TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 950
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the year under consideration. In response to the above notices, Ld. AR of the assessee attended the proceedings and submitted the relevant information as called for. 4. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO observed that the assessee has claimed exempt income on Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares of M/s. HPC Biosciences Ltd. and claimed the exemption of Rs. 41,80,283/-. By relying the Investigation report of the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata and the relevant modus operandi adopted by various beneficiaries by opting exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act, the Ld. AO observed that his M/s. HPC Biosciences Ltd. is also one such company which was identified as a listed penny stock on BSE which was used for generating bogus LTCG. By relying on the detailed findings in the investigation report of Kolkata, he observed that the investigation made by the assessee through Mr. Ankur Jain, was claimed to be an employee in the brokerage company M/s. Narayan Securities Ltd., however, the compliance officer of the Narayan Securities Ltd. had denied the same and stated that no such employee existed. The Ld. AO further observed that Mr. Ankur Jain may be the one of the shareholder....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the assessee, ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Ld. AO. 6. Aggrieved with the above order, the assessee is in appeal raising following grounds: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the following additions made by the Assessing Officer: i. Rs. 44,60,283/- being the amount of long term capital gains claimed exempt under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') invoking section 69A of the Act; ii. Rs. 1,42,208/- on account of alleged commission paid invoking section 69C of the Act. All the above actions being erroneous unlawful and untenable it is prayed that the same must be quashed with directions for appropriate relief." 7. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee brought to our notice page 2 of the assessment order and submitted that the Ld. AO proceeded with preconceived notion that it is a penny stock. Further, he submitted that the ssessee has purchased the shares online and sold the same online and submitted that the assessee has not involved any way in any off line transactions. He submitted that there is no evidence with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r section 10(38) merely by relying on statements of accommodation entry providers which were recorded much before date of survey. Pr. CIT v. Anupama Mohapatra (2024) 299 Taxman 177 (SC) 5) SLP dismissed against order of High Court that where Assessing Officer denied exemption claimed by assessee under section 10(38) on long-term capital gain on sale of shares on basis of statement of entry operators recorded on various dates in some other proceedings not connect with assessee and no opportunity to cross-examine so-called entry providers was given to assessee thereby violating principles of natural justice, Tribunal was justified in deleting addition made by Assessing Officer. Pr. CIT v. Kishore Kumar Mohapatra (2025) 475 ITR 198 (SC) 6) Where Assessing Officer denied exemption claimed by assessee under section 10(38) on long-term capital gain on sale of shares on basis of statement of entry operators recorded on various dates in some other proceedings not connected with assessee and no opportunity to cross-examine so-called entry providers was given to assessee thereby violating principles of natural justice, Tribunal was justified in deleting ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Patel (2024) 162 taxmann.com 892 (Guj.) 3) Where assessee purchased shares of a company listed on Bombay Stock Exchange through a D-mat account, with payments made via banking channels and Security Transaction Tax paid, fulfilling all conditions for exemption under section 10(38), Assessing Officer could not question genuineness of those shares or treat them as bogus to make an addition under section 68. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD) v. Nilesh Jain (HUF) (2024) 163 taxmann.com 229 (MP) 4) Where assessee had produced all relevant documentary evidence to establish genuineness of purchase and sale transaction in shares and no contrary evidence doubting correctness of such evidences was produced treating said transaction as sham was not justified. Pr. CIT v. Gaurav Bagaria (2023) 453 ITR 513 (Raj.) 5) Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence that asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....39;ble Delhi High Court. The appellant had booked LTCG of Rs. 73,77,806/- and short exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act. The AO added the amount of Rs. 73,77,806/- by denying the exemption claimed u/s 10(38) on account of LTCG. The AO found the transaction pertaining to purchase of shares by assessee of M/s Cressanda Solutions Ltd. to be a bogus transaction by holding that it was a penny stock. The addition was confirmed by CIT(A) and the I'TAT. After examining the Issue at hand, Hon'ble Delhi ITAT passed an order upholding the order of Hon'ble ITAT. The High Court held: "7. Thus, the Tribunal has In depth analysed the balance sheets and the profit and loss accounts of Cressanda Solutions Ltd. which shows that the astronomical Increase in the share price of the said company which led to returns of 491% for the Appellant, was completely unjustified. Pertinently, the EPS of the sald company was Rs. 0.01/- as in March 2016, It was Rs. 0.01/- as in March 2015 and -0.48/- as in March 2014. Similarly, the other financial parameters of the said company cannot Justify the price in excess of Rs. 600/- at which the Appellant claims to have sold the said shares to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he conduct of assesses and other surrounding circumstances in order to see whether the assesses is liable to the provisions of section 68 or not. In the case of NR Portfolio, it was held that the genuineness and credibility are deeper and obtrusive. Similarly, the bank statements provided by the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions cannot be considered In view of the Judgment of Hon'ble court In the case of Pratham Telecom India Pvt. Ltd., wherein, it was stated that bank statement is not sufficient enough to discharge the burden. Regarding the failure to accord the opportunity of cross examination, we rely on the Judgment of Prem Castings Pvt. Ltd. Similarly, the Tribunal in the case of Udit Kalra, ITA No. 6717/Del/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 has categorically held that when there was specific confirmation with the Revenue that the assessee has Indulged in non-genuine and bogus capital gains obtained from the transactions of purchase and sale of shares, It can be a good reason to treat the transactions as bogus. The differences of the case of Udit kalra attempted by the Ld. AR does not add any credence to justify the transactions. The Investigation Wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we, hereby decline to Interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A)." (emphasis supplied) 8. From the above extract, It would be seen that the Cressanda Solutions Ltd. was in fact Identified by the Bombay Stock Exchange as a penny stock being used for obtaining bogus Long Term Capital Gain. NO evidence of actual sale except the contract notes Issued by the share broker were produced by the assessee. No question of law, therefore arises in the present case and the consistent finding of fact returned against the Appellant are based on evidence on record. 9. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do not find any merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. 2. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Swati Bajaj on 14.06.2022 (Calcutta High Court) While dealing with a batch of 90 appeals filed by the reveriue on a common Issue, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court dealt with the substantial question of law as to whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and In law Ld ITAT erred in ignoring the direct and circumsta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e treated as tainted. However, the assessee had opportunity to prove that there was no manipulation at the other end and whatever gains the assessee has reaped was not tainted. This has not been proved or established by any of the assessee before us. Therefore, the assessing officers were well Justified In coming to a conclusion that the so called explanation offered by the assessee was not to their satisfaction. Thus, the assessee having not proved the genuineness of the claim, the creditworthiness of the companies in which they had Invested and the Identity of the persons to whom the transactions were done, have to necessarily fall. In such factual scenario, the Assessing Officers as well as the CIT(A) have adopted an Inferential process which we find to be a process which would be followed by a reasonable and prudent person. The Assessing Officers and the CIT(A) have culled out proximate facts In each of the cases, took Into consideration the surrounding circumstances which came to light after the Investigation, assessed the conduct of the assessee, took note of the proximity of the time between the buy and sale operations and also the sudden and steep rise of the price of the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LTCG arising out of the sale of scrips of M/s Blosciences Ltd. based on Investigation carried out by Directorate of Investigation, Kolkatta on accommodation entry of LTCG and Identified beneficiaries who have taken bogus entry of LTCG. The findings given by Hon'ble ITAT Delhi, based upon the Judgment of PCIT vs Swat! Bajaj (2022) 446 ITR 56 (Cal), are as under: - "16. Let us now peep into the precedents. 16.1 In Pr. CIT vs. Swati Bajaj (2022) 446 ITR 56(Cal), the AO received Information from Investigation Wing that the prices of some shares of penny stock companies which included the company X in which the assessee made Investment, were artificially rigged to benefit shareholders through bogus claim of long term capital gain. The assessee had purchased shares of the company for Rs. 1 lakh and when the Investments in shares became eligible for long term capital gain it was sold for Rs. 29 lakhs during the period when the general market trend was recessive. The AO opined that the shares of the company. X matched all the features of the companies which were provided bogus long term capital gain and made addition under section 68 of the Act by treating long term c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to be a case where the black money stashed abroad is coming back to India (purchase) or money being sent out of the country (sale). The report points out that while only Rs. 27.57 crores have gone out of the country, an amount of above Rs. 114.97 crores has come In. The report has been communicated to the DGIT (inv.) of all the states. In the opinion of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court the methodology of the Investigation by the department is quite different from the normal method of Investigation which commences from the Investor or the assessee as the case may be. On account of huge sums of money being claimed as long term capital gain/long term capital loss, a different approach/methodology was adopted by the department by commencing the Investigation not from the individuals who traded with penny stocks but Investigation has started targeting the Individuals who dealt with those penny stocks This concept can be mentioned to be one of "working backward". This is one of the modes of causing an Investigation, considering its magnitude. The approach of the department cannot therefore be faulted. 26.2 The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court observed further that the court s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Calcutta High Court in the case of Swati Bajaj (supra) and find that the issue before us le clearly covered by the said decision. The facts stated in the said case are Identical to that of the case before us, as also, pleading of the assessee before Hon'ble High Court being Identical. Parity of facts is discerned from the Hon'ble High Court order from where it notes that the AO relied on the Investigation report to find long term capital gain returned by the assessee on sale of shares of M/s Surbhi Chemicals are relating to penny stock and to be in the nature of mere accommodation entries. The facts are noted at para 3 of the Judgement. Pleadings of the assessee before the Hon'ble Court were also Identical as that made before us i.e., (i) Investigation report relied upon by the AO was general report. (ii) Adverse report was not confronted to the assessee (iii) No opportunity to cross examination provided to the assessee, and (iv) Assessee's onus of proving genuineness of the transaction stood discharged. 9. The Hon'ble High Court dealt with each and every contention raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee before It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bench) The assessee had purchased shares of two penny stocks of Kolkata based companies i.e., 8000 shares at the rate of Rs. 5.50 per share on 08.08.2003 and 4000 shares at the rate of Rs. 4/per share on 05.08.2003. The assessee sold 2200 shares at an exorbitant rate of Rs. 486.55 per share on 07.06.2005 and 800 shares on 20.06.2005 at the rate of Rs. 485.65. the authorities held that the assessee had not tendered cogent evidence to explain as to how the shares in an unknown company worth Rs. 5/- had Jumped to Rs. 485/- In no time. Addition confirmed. 7. Sanat Kumar Vs ACIT (2019-TIOL-1296-ITAT-DEL, ITA No.1881/Del./2018) Where Hon'ble ITAT Delhi held that when entire transaction apparently appears to be bogus as It provides unimaginable appreciation in value of shares, then it would amount to evasion and Initial transaction made through banking channel will not exonerate the purchaser. 8. Poola Aimani Vs ITO [2018] 106 taxmann.com 66 (Delhi - Trib.) where Hon'ble ITAT Delhi held as follows: "I find that in the case of Charan Singh v. Chandra Bhan Singh AIR 1988 SC 6370, the Hon'ble Supreme Court www have clarified that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erm capital gains. It is noted that on similar facts and circumstances, Hon'ble ITAT A-Bench, Chandigarh in the case of Abhimanyu Soln v. ACIT [IT Appeal No. 951 (CHD.) of 2016, dated 18-4-2016), have expressed the view that the undisclosed Income In. the garb of long term capital gain has to be assessed as unexplained. The Hon'ble ITAT have held as under: - "14. The ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court In the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 1TR 8012002-TIOL-885-SC-IT-LB Is squarely applicable in this case. Though the assessee has received the amounts by the way of account payee cheques, the assessee could nowhere prove the purchase of shares as claimed to have been made on 02/72/2008 in cash and It urns also not proved about the availability of the funds with the assessee as on the date of purchase of shares. The assessee was not in India as per the passport details available as per the record. This, coupled with the fact that the transfer of money in cash from Ludhiana to Delhi and a person representing the broker operating at Kolkata has collected the money at Delhi cannot be accepted. The tax authorities are entitled to look into the surround....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on'ble Supreme Court have observed as under: "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is within the framework of law. Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay the taxes honestly without resorting to subterfuges." 5.3 Every person is entitled to so arrange his affairs as to avoid taxation but the arrangement- must be real and genuine and not a sham or make believe... 5.4 Keeping in view of the aforesaid discussions, I am of the view that documents submitted as evidences to prove the genuineness of transaction are themselves found to serve as smoke screen to cover up the true nature of the transactions in the facts and circumstances of the case as it is revealed that purchase and sale of shares are arranged transactions to create bogus profit in the garb of tax exempt long terra capital gain by well organised network of entry providers with the sole motive to sell such entries to enable the beneficiary to account for the undisclosed Income for a consideration or c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....akharchi Companies through which manipulative transactions in securities to either artificially raise or lower the market rate of the shares are being done. 10. Abhimanyu Soin Vs ACIT 2018-TIOL-733-ITAT-CHD where Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh held that unnatural LTCG 3072% over a period of 1.5 years from scrip of the unlisted company whose even net worth is not known to the assessee, without expert advice is beyond the business logics and is valid reason to make addition for undisclosed Income. When assessee falls to prove through evidences that purchase and sale transactions of shares are genuine, claim of exempted LTCO can be disallowed and addition for undisclosed Income can be made. When facts Indicates that whole process of trading in shares is depicted just to avoid tax liability, the addition for undisclosed Income should be upheld. 11. Smt. M.K.Raleshwarl Vs ITO (ITA No.1723/Bang/2018) Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore held that while dealing with the issue of Long term capital gains accrued to the assessee In short span, one has to examine the financials of the company whose shares were Inflated within a short period and after the sharp rise in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The shares of the company was declared as "Penny Stock" by SEBI and the broker Sanju Kabra, through whom the shares were sold by the assessee was Indicted for manipulating the prices of penny stock shares. The tax authorities have rightly applied the test of human probabilities to examine the claim of purchase and sale of shares made by the assessee. The CIT(A) was Justified in confirming the order of the AO by applying the test of human probabilities. 15. Ratnakar M Pujari Vs ITO [2016-TIOL-1746-ITAT-MUM] Where Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai held that a transaction of 'off market purchase of share' for Which payments were made in cash and the brokers had issued pre dated contract notes, is liable to be treated as bogus transaction, and hence such cash receipts are liable to be treated as 'unexplained cash receipts'. 16. Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of ITO Ve Shamim M Bherwani (2016) (69 Taxmann.com 65) Where Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai held that where assessee claimed Income earned from sale of shares as exempt under section 10(38), In view of fact that purchase transaction of said shares was not recorded In stock exchange and, more....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive by law." The above ratio as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been reiterated and applied by the Hon'ble Apex Court In the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (214 ITR 801): It is essential on the part of the Assessing Officer to look into the real nature of transaction and what happens in the real word and contextualize the same to such transactions in the real market situation. Further, In the case of McDowell &; Co, Ltd. (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme court have observed as under: "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is within the frame work of law. Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning and It is wrong to encourage of entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay the taxes honestly resorting to subterfuges. 18. Sandeep Bhargava vs. ACIT, Delhi [ITA No. 420/Del./2019] G Bench Delhi Hon'ble ITAT Delhi upheld the findings of CIT(A) confirming additions with disallowing benefit u/s 10(38) availed by the assessee in respect of sale of shares of M/s. HPC Biosciences." 9. In the rejoinde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he same below: "17. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the Assessing Officer was carried away by the report of the Investigation Wing and the exparte Ad-Interim order of the SEBI. It can be seen that the entire assessment order has been framed by the Assessing Officer without conducting any enquiry from the relevant parties or independent source or evidence but has merely relied upon the SEBI order without conducting any independent and separate enquiry in the case of the appellant. 18. It is provided u/s 142(2) of the Act that for the purpose of obtaining full information in respect of income of loss of any person, the Assessing Officer may make such enquiry as he considers necessary. 19. Similar facts were considered by the coordinate bench in the case of Smt. Karuna Garg ITA No. 1069 & 2772/DEL/2019, Smt Bindu Garg in ITA No. 1168 & 1169/DEL/2019, Smt Krishna Devi in ITA No. 1070/DEL/2019 and Har Dev Sahai Gupta in ITA No. 1264/DEL/2019. In these cases, the quarrel was in respect of scrip of M/s Esteem Bio Organic Food Processing Ltd, which is one of the four companies whose names are mentioned at Para 12 of this order. 20. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shares in question was made by Sh. Salasar Trading Company. Notice was issued to this entity as well, but when the notices were returned unserved, the AO did not take the matter any further. He thereafter simply proceeded on the basis of the financials of the company to come to the conclusion that the transactions were accommodation entries, and thus, fictitious. The conclusion drawn by the AO, that there was an agreement to convert unaccounted money by taking fictitious LTCG in a pre-planned manner, is therefore entirely unsupported by any material on record. This finding is thus purely an assumption based on conjecture made by the AO. This flawed approach forms the reason for the learned ITAT to interfere with the findings of the lower tax authorities. The learned ITAT after considering the entire conspectus of case and the evidence brought on record, held that the Respondent had successfully discharged the initial onus cast upon it under the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. It is recorded that "There is no dispute that the shares of the two companies were purchased online, the payments have been made through banking channel, and the shares were dematerialized and the sales ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d cases, thus, are of no assistance to the case sought to be canvassed by the Revenue. 13. The learned ITAT, being the last fact-finding authority, on the basis of the evidence brought on record, has rightly come to the conclusion that the lower tax authorities are not able to sustain the addition without any cogent material on record. We thus find no perversity in the Impugned Order. 14. In this view of the matter, no question of law, much less a substantial question of law arises for our consideration." 21. In our considered view, whether the assessee has discharged his onus cast upon him by provisions of section 68 of the Act or not is purely a question of fact and considering the vortex of evidences, we are of the considered view that the assessee has successfully discharged the onus cast upon him by provisions of section 68 of the Act. As mentioned elsewhere, the discharge of onus is purely a question of fact, the judicial decisions relied upon by the ld. DR would do no good on the peculiar plethora of evidences in respect of facts in hand and hence the judicial decisions relied upon by both the sides, though perused, but not considered on the facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....049G Yes Till date of this order 3 Ms. Madhu Anand AXTPA8813F Yes Till date of this order 4 Goldline International Finvest Ltd. AACCG6377M Yes Till date of this order 5 Shri. Madhukar Dubey & its Proprietorship firm viz. N V Sales Corporation, Magnum Industrial AIJPD7329J Yes Till date of this order 6 Shri. Satendra Kumar & its Proprietorship firm viz. Nisha Traders AWWPK8525E Yes Till date of this order 7 Avisha Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd AAACA5715D Yes Till date of this order 8 Shri. Sumit Kumar & its Proprietorship firm viz. Durga Prasad & Co. ARUPK1589P Yes Till date of this order 9 Shri. Raj Kumar & its Proprietorship firm viz. Bright Securities BNBPK2681L No 1 Year 10 Shri. Prakash Gupta & its Proprietorship firm viz. Shiv Traders ARVPG7849R Yes Till date of this order 11 AMS Powertronic Pvt. Ltd AAECA8718H Yes Till date of this order 23. This SEBI order is dated 22.12.2020 whereas the transactions which have been considered in this appeal took place in F.Y. 2014-15 and therefore, restrain after a gap of more than 5 years would do ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y different. 5. In our view, the Tribunal has not committed any perversity or applied incorrect principles to the given facts and when the facts and circumstances are properly analysed and correct test is applied to decide the issue at hand, then, we do not think that question as pressed raises any substantial question of law. 6. The appeal is devoid of merits and it is dismissed with no order as to costs." 12. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi in ITA 125/2020 dated 15.01.2021 held as under: - "8. Mr. Hossain argues that in cases relating to LTCG in penny stocks, there may not be any direct evidence in the hands of the Revenue to establish that the investment made in such companies was an accommodation entry. Thus the Court should take the aspect of human probabilities into consideration that no prudent investor would invest in penny scrips. Considering the fact that the financials of these companies do not support the gains made by these companies in the stock exchange, as well as the fact that despite the notices issued by the AO, there was no evidence forthcoming to sustain the credibility of these compani....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvey operations conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that the AO made an attempt to delve into the question of infusion of Respondent's unaccounted money, but he did not dig deeper. Notices issued under Sections 133(6)/131 of the Act were issued to M/s Gold Line International Finvest Limited, but nothing emerged from this effort. The payment for the shares in question was made by Sh. Salasar Trading Company. Notice was issued to this entity as well, but when the notices were returned unserved, the AO did not take the matter any further. He thereafter simply proceeded on the basis of the financials of the company to come to the conclusion that the transactions were accommodation entries, and thus, fictitious. The conclusion drawn by the AO, that there was an agreeme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Wing. Lastly, reliance placed by the Revenue on Suman Poddar v. ITO (supra) and Sumati Dayal v. CIT (supra) is of no assistance. Upon examining the judgment of Suman Poddar (supra) at length, we find that the decision therein was arrived at in light of the peculiar facts and circumstances demonstrated before the ITAT and the Court, such as, inter alia, lack of evidence produced by the Assessee therein to show actual sale of shares in that case. On such basis, the ITAT had returned the finding of fact against the Assessee, holding that the genuineness of share transaction was not established by him. However, this is quite different from the factual matrix at hand. Similarly, the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (supra) too turns ITA 125/2020 and connected matters Page 10 of 10 on its own specific facts. The above-stated cases, thus, are of no assistance to the case sought to be canvassed by the Revenue. 13. The learned ITAT, being the last fact-finding authority, on the basis of the evidence brought on record, has rightly come to the conclusion that the lower tax authorities are not able to sustain the addition without any cogent material on record. We thus find no perversity i....