Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 217 - ITAT MUMBAIDeletion of unaccounted purchases Exact period in which the shares were purchased Held that:- The genuineness of the claim of the assessee of having purchased 14000 shares of M/s Orbit Corporation has not been disputed either by AO in the assessment order - the shares were not transferred to the D-mat account of the assessee, the assessee did not make any payment to the concerned brokers and when this matter was finally sorted out and the shares were transferred to the D-mat account of the assessee by the concerned brokers in the month of December, 2007, the assessee made the payment against the said shares immediately thereafter - The documentary evidence clearly established that the shares were purchased by the assessee in the month of May 2007 itself at the prevailing market rate and it was not a case of purchase of shares by the assessee in the month of December 2007 - there was not an iota of evidence brought on record by the AO to show that any consideration for the purchase of said shares over and above what was shown by the assessee in her books of account was paid by the assessee and the allegation of the AO that the assessee had paid consideration outside the books of account was based purely on surmises and conjecture as rightly held by the CIT(A) thus, there was no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by AO to the total income of the assessee Decided against Revenue. Treatment of income as STCG Income from Business Held that:- The assessee had transacted only in 24 scrips during the year consideration out of which 12 scrips were allotted to her through IPOs It cannot be said that the frequency of transactions in shares of the assessee was high - Even the reasons for immediate sale of the shares allotted through IPOs were satisfactorily explained by the assessee - There were no repetitive transactions entered into by the assessee in the same scrips and the entire investment in shares was made by the assessee out of her own funds - The transactions in all the delivery based shares were consistently treated by assessee as investment transactions and this treatment given by assessee in the books of account was accepted by AO in the earlier years Relying upon CIT. Versus GOPAL PUROHIT [2010 (11) TMI 222 - Supreme Court of India] - CIT(A) was fully justified in directing the AO to treat the profit derived by the assessee from the delivery based transaction as capital gain - there was no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) giving relief to the assessee Decided against Revenue.
|