TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1024X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant: Shri Rajesh B. Gupte, A.R. For the Respondent: Shri P. Yadav, D.R. O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.09.11 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [(hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2003-04. The assessee through the grounds of appeal has agitated the addition of ₹ 12,00,170/- u/s. 68 and of ₹ 60,009/- u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act. 2. The facts of the case as brought out from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) are that a search seizure action u/s. 132 was undertaken in the case of M/s. Mahasagar Securities P. Ltd. an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A). 3. Before the Ld. CIT(A), it had been contended that the 14200 shares of Buniyad Chemicals Ltd were purchased in cash for ₹ 8,520/- on 5/6/2001 through sub-broker M/s. Gold Star Finvest Pvt. Ltd and they were transferred in name of assessee in the companies records on 30/6/2001 and then sold through the same sub-broker M/s. Gold Star Finvest Pvt. Ltd. on 27/1/2003 for ₹ 12,00,610/- i.e. after holding them for more than 1 year. The shares purchased and sold were backed by the contract notes issued by sub-broker M/s. Gold Star Finvest Pvt. Ltd. who was registered member of stock exchange and having SEBI registration number and that the sale proceeds were received through cheques only. It had also been contended that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal has decided the issue of long term capital gain in favour of the assessee as the said statement of Shri Mukesh Chokshi was a general statement and could not be corroborated by any material evidence. He has relied upon the following decisions in this respect: 1. Kataria Ketan Ishwarlal Vs. ITO ITA No.4304/M/2007 decided on 30.04.2010. 2. ACIT Vs. Shri Ravindrakumar Toshniwal ITA No.5302/M/2008 decided on 24.02.2010 3. ITO Vs. Truptic Shah ITA No.1442/M/2010 decided on 29.04.2011 4. Smt. Manjulaben L. Shah Vs. ITO ITA No.3112/M/2014 decided on 31.10.2014 5. We find that the facts of the above stated cases were all most identical to that of the assessee. In the case of Kataria Ketan Ishwarlal Vs. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this view of the matter, we hold that the sale transaction entered into by the assessee is genuine transaction. Since the Assessing Officer has not disputed regarding the purchase of house property and since the assessee fulfils the conditions for treating the profit on sale of such shares as long term capital gain and fulfilled the conditions for allowability of deduction u/s. 54F, therefore, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee. This ground by the assessee is accordingly allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. 6. Further in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Ravindrakumar Toshniwal (supra), the share profit was earned from the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rajinidevi A. Chowdhary [cited supra], which is on similar set of facts, the AO could have verified from the Registrar of companies as to whether the shares have been transferred and the names of the shareholders in whose names shares have been transferred. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Rajinidevi A. Chowdhary has also been upheld by the jurisdictional High Court as taken note of by this Tribunal in the case of Shri Pinakin L. Shah [cited supra], to which one of us i.e. the Judicial Member, is a party. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT[A] and the same is upheld. 14 In the result, revenue's appeal is dismissed. 7. The facts of the case in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
