9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee regarding long-term capital gain of Rs. 7,09,740 arising on sale of shares and assessing the entire sale proceeds of such shares of Rs. 7,34,206 as income from undisclosed source. 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that it is noted by the Assessing Officer on page No. 2 of the asst. order that during this year, the assessee has sold 10,500 shares of Betsy Growth Finance Ltd. (BGFL) on 3-7-2003 and the claim of the assessee is that these shares have been purchased on 17-6-2002. It is also noted by the Assessing Officer that these shares are alleged to have been purchased @ Rs. 2.10 per share and were alleged to have been sold at Rs. 70 per share. The assessee has shown sale proceeds of shares at Rs. 7,34,206 and has worked out long-t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted a reply alongwith a photocopy of cutting from the newspaper Hindustan showing rate of Rs. 70 per share of BGFL on 21-6-2003. The Assessing Officer has considered this reply of the assessee dated 22-12-2006 and thereafter it was held by him that mere submitting of a newspaper cutting showing the rate of the script is not sufficient evidence to establish that the shares were actually traded or transacted. It is also held by the Assessing Officer that the assessee could not establish that the shares were traded from MP stock Exchange or for that matter from any stock exchange. It is also noted that the assessee could not produce letter from the alleged stock broker to establish his claim. By making these observations it was held by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that a contact note and bill of the share broker for sale of the shares are available on pages 5 and 6 of the paper book. Reliance was placed on the both circular No. 704, dated 28-4-1995 and circular No. 768 dated 24-6-1998. It was also submitted that copy of these two circulars are available on pages 10 to 13 of the paper book. It was submitted that necessary evidences have been furnished by the assessee and hence the claim of the assessee should be accepted that there was long-term capital gain of Rs. 7,09,740 on sale of shares of Rs. 7,34,206. 4. As against this, Ld. DR. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the matter on record and gone through the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ery must have been in physical form and not through D-Mat account. If the shares are delivered in physical form, generally the bill of the seller/broker should contain the descriptive numbers of the shares delivered to the buyer i.e. the assessee in the present case. But in the sale bill in question submitted by the assessee in support of her claim that these shares were purchased on 17-6-2002 @ Rs. 2.10 per share, no descriptive number is mentioned in the said bill. In the computation of capital gain shown by the assessee, the assessee has deducted Rs. 23,000 regarding cost of shares purchased. Such computation is, appearing on page No. 1 of the paper book. As per the assessee, the payment of Rs. 23,000 was made in cash and as per the ledg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transfer deeds. In the present case, nothing is brought on record regarding actual delivery of shares and transfer deeds by the alleged seller i.e. Diwakar Securities Ltd. We admit that shares in question are treated to the D-Mat account of the assessee on 3-7-2003 and entries appearing in the copy of D-Mat account of the assessee with NSDL are reproduced below :- [Not Reproduced] 7. From the above, it can be seen that on 3-7-2003, 10500 shares were traded and such credit is on account of market receipt from the same client ID No. 14528754 and the same were debited on 5-7-2003 and the client ID is same i.e. 14528754. It means from the same account, these shares were transferred to the assessee on 3-7-2003 to the same D-Mat account. These ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d hence we feel that no interference is called for in the orders of the authorities below on this issue we confirm the same. These grounds of assessee are rejected.
8. Ground No. 4 of the appeal reads as under :-
4. "That the recorded household expenses were adequate and reasonable. On facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was no warrant to reject the declared withdrawals and to compute the same on estimate not supported by any evidence to the effect that the assessee spent more than the recorded figure. The consequent addition of Rs. 39,000 deserves to be deleted being illegal, erroneous and untenable on facts and in law."
9. to 16. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve in minor issues]. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
