Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1680 - AT - Income TaxDenial of exemption u/s 10(38) - addition u/s 68 - bogus LTCG - the entire conclusions drawn by the revenue authorities, are based on a common report of the Director of Investigation, Kolkata, which was general in nature and not specific to any assessee - HELD THAT:- Tribunal and Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court has consistently held that cases should be based on evidence and not on generalisation, human probabilities, suspicion, conjectures and surmises. In all cases additions were deleted. Assessee has filed all necessary evidences in support of the transactions. Some of these evidences are (a) evidence of purchase of shares, (b) evidence of payment for purchase of shares made by way of account payee cheque, copy of bank statements, (c) copy of balance sheet disclosing investments, (d) copy of demat statement reflecting purchase, (e) evidence of sale of shares through the stock exchange, (f) copy of demat statement showing the sale of shares, (g) copy of bank statement reflecting sale receipts, (h) copy of brokers ledger, (i) copy of Contract Notes etc. The proposition of law laid down in case laws by the Jurisdictional High Court as well as by the ITAT Kolkata in SANJAY MEHTA VERSUS ACIT, KOLKATA [2018 (10) TMI 187 - ITAT KOLKATA] and other decisions on these issues are in favour of the assessee. These are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. The ld. Departmental Representative, though not leaving his ground, could not controvert the claim of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the issue in question is covered by the above cited decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court and the ITAT. I am bound to follow the same. - In view of the above discussion I delete the addition made u/s 68, on account of Long Term Capital Gains.
|