Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 56 - AT - Income TaxBogus LTCG - Addition u/s 68 - treating the purchase of shares as non-genuine and consequently sale of shares and LTCG as unexplained income of the assessee - HELD THAT:- The assessee,submitted before us that on 21.11.2014 the assessee sold 5000 shares in Bombay Stock Exchange at different dates and gained Rs.675 per share within 24 months. Thus, there was exorbitant scrip increase from 20.04.2012 to 27.12.2014. AO also made observations in the Assessment Order that the assessee bought shares at Rs.20./- when the market price was of Rs.17.45 on 02.04.2012 in fact. There was no basis from the analysis of the company that Kappac Pharma Limited scrip price shares. These objections are separate objections by the AO from the investigation report. The assessment order is not solely based on investigation but the AO has verified each aspect about increase in the share and how transaction took place in assessee’s own case. Though the assessee has sold the scrip through Bombay Stock Exchange, it has not purchased from the stock exchange market and, therefore, the conclusion of the Assessing Officer was based on factual circumstances in assessee’s own case. The purchase of Kappac Pharma Limited share is in fact appears bogus in nature as the scrip when having share price of Rs.17.45 was purchased by the assessee at Rs.20/- outside the regular stock exchange. The claim of the Ld. AR that the assessee has done the transaction and submitted his demat statement as well as transaction statement along with debit note and share certificate does not shun away the aspect that the assessee was very well aware about the brokers in respect of penny stock. Therefore, the contentions as well as the decision submitted by the assessee are not relevant in the present case. In fact, in case of Udit Kalra [2019 (4) TMI 834 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] decided has dealt with ‘Kappac Pharma Limited scrip’ and held that the transaction in the said scrip was not genuine and bogus. Therefore, Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) has rightly denied LTCG exemption under Section 10(38) of the Act to the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is, therefore, dismissed.
|