Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (5) TMI 650 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - genuineness of LTCG - Whether assessment is both erroneous as well as prejudicial in interest of the Revenue simultaneously? - HELD THAT:- Assessing Officer had issued sec. 133(6) letter/notice to the M/s. SHCL during the course of scrutiny which stood adequately replied in assessee's favour. Coupled with this, all the relevant factual details in support of the assessee's share purchase document, contract notes, bank statement, already in the case records. Coupled with this, Learned CIT-DR fails to rebut the clinching fact that although the PCIT's detailed discussion extracted in the preceding paragraphs has sought to make out a case of artificial price rigging between the assessee, promoters entry operators of the entity in light of Ministry of Finance's letter dated 24.07.2015 figures, there is not even an iota of material quoted against the assessee to have been engaged in all the foregoing artificial price rigging. We are observing in view of all these facts that the Assessing Officer had rightly accepted the assessee's LTCG keeping in making the overwhelming evidence forming part of records. As in case GITESH TIKMANI, GIRISH TIKMANI [2019 (9) TMI 1177 - ITAT KOLKATA], CIT vs. Ratan ITA No. 105/2016, M/s. Classic Growers Ltd. [2013 (2) TMI 825 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT], CIT vs. Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd. [2013 (10) TMI 1037 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT], CIT vs. Bhagwati Prasad Agarwal [2009 (4) TMI 138 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] have accepted genuineness of similar LTCG. Since the issue is covered by all the foregoing decisions of hon'ble jurisdictional high court, we observe that the Assessing Officer had rightly treated the assessee's foregoing LTCG derived from sale of shares to be genuine. Thus we hold that PCIT's exercise of revision jurisdiction merely on suspicious circumstances by invoking in sec. 263 Explanation (supra) with effect from 01.06.2015 is not sustaining. We therefore reverse the PCIT's order under challenge and restore the impugned assessment framed by the Assessing Officer - Decided in favour of assessee.
|