2026 (4) TMI 89

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual filed his original Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2018-19 on 17-07-2018 declaring total income of Rs. 15,53,920/-. Information received from the department that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of bogus accommodation entries operated and managed by entry operator Shri Naresh Jain. The information also suggests that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries in manipulation of share price of M/s. Oasis Tradelink Ltd. amounting to Rs. 40,95,442/- and assessee claimed Long Term Capital Gain exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act amounting to Rs. 37,24,755/-. Therefore a show cause notice u/s. 148 of the Act issued on 29-03-2022. 2.1. In response, the ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....14. Asst. Year Opening Bal (A) Purchase (B)   Sale (c)   Closing Bal D=(A+B+C) 2015-16   Date of purchase Qty Date of sale Qty     - 07-07-2014 115000 - -       01-10-2014 12000       Total -   127000   - 12700 2016-17 12700                   15-07-2015 12000           06-08-2015 12000           10-08-2015 16000           11-08-2015 16000   &nbs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e department has not disputed any purchase or sale of shares of M/ s Oasis Tradelink Ltd in earlier years and has been accepted in case of assessee which was done through registered share broker namely ACML Capital Markets Limited on online platform of ASE The sales were as per the rates of prevailing market share price on that day. The Summary of sale of shares of M/s Oasis Tradelink Limited during the captioned assessment year is as under: Sr. No. Date of Sale (A) Qty (B) Rate (c) Sale amount (D=B+C) Brokerage Other charges (like STT, BSE trf Tax, SEBI chg. Etc.)(E) Ne Amount receipt (F=D-E) Opening balance   58434           1 29/05/2017 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enuineness of transaction undertaken through ACML Capital Markets Limited Considering the facts of the case and above cited judicial decisions your goodself is requested to drop the revisional proceedings-initiated U/S 263 of the Act. 3.2. The above reply was considered by Ld. PCIT and held that the reassessment order passed is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue thereby set-aside the reassessment order with a direction to the A.O. to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with the provisions of law after duly examining the facts of the case by giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. Aggrieved against the Revision order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may call for and examine the record at any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the Assessing Officer for the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, he may after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify (including (i) an order enhancing or modifying the assessment or cancelling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment, or (ii) an order modifying the ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dras) held as follows: "The Explanation to section 263(1)(c) makes it clear that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner, the exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 is barred The Commissioner in the order states that the appeal pertains to the claim made by the assessee under section 54 and it has got nothing to do with the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 54F. The said finding rendered by the Commissioner is wholly unsustainable, since the assessee went on appeal against the re-assessment order stating that his claim for deduction under section 54 should be accepted (Para 22) Therefore, in the process of considering as to what relief the assessee is entitled to, the Assessing Officer held....