Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1125 - HC - Income TaxScope of appeal u/s 260A - Disallowance of loss on sale of securities - Whether transaction in securities has no nexus and corelation with the deal in land transaction? - as per CIT-A assessee had entered the transactions to reduce the taxable income and thereby artificial loss had been created which cannot be allowed to be set off against the land deal income - as per AO admitted that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries to a number of persons/entities in the form of LTCG unsecured loans, bogus purchases etc. vide his statement on oath given by him before the DDIT - ITAT allowed the appeals of the assessee holding that although the Assessing Officer entertained a serious doubt as regards the genuineness of the transactions, yet such doubt was not fortified with some concrete materials to take the view that the transactions were bogus - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that substantially, the submissions canvassed on behalf of the Revenue, while criticizing the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, are based on facts rather than on any question of law much less a substantial question of law. The scope of appeal under Section 260A before the High Court is limited. The Appellate Tribunal took notice of something very important. It took notice of the fact that the loss in trading of the lands had occurred much before the assessee earned profit on the sale of land. The Appellate Tribunal took notice of the fact that the loss in trading of lands was suffered by the assessee on 1st January 2013, whereas he derived profit on the sale of land on 24th January 2013. In such circumstances, there was no good reason for the C.I.T. (A) to doubt the bona fide of the assessee and take the view that the transactions were not fair and genuine. In the instant case, there is no substantial question of law which could be said to be arising from the order of the Tribunal. It cannot be argued on behalf of the Tribunal that the findings recorded by the Tribunal are based on no evidence and or while arriving at a said finding relevant admissible evidence has not been taken into consideration or inadmissible evidence has been taken into consideration or legal principles have not been applied in appreciating the evidence or the evidence has been misread. Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal vs. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd [1973 (4) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] wherein taken the view that if a trader transfers his goods to another trader at a price less than the market price and the transaction is otherwise found to be bona fide, the Taxing Authority cannot take into account the market price of those goods ignoring the real price fetched to ascertain the profit from the transaction. We are of the opinion that on a conspectus of the factual scenario, noted above, the conclusion of the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer had raised number of doubts about the genuineness of the transactions without any supporting substantial question of law. The Tribunal, being a final fact finding authority, in the absence of demonstrated perversity in its finding, the interference therewith by this Court is not warranted. - Decided against revenue
|