TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wholly mis- placed. the decision of the Tribunal is based on findings of fact. No substantial question of law arises. - - - - - Dated:- 23-9-2010 - DEVADHAR J. P., CHAUDHARI A. B. JJ JUDGMENT J. P. Devadhar J.- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By a common order dated July 24, 2009, which is impugned in these appeals, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had disposed of 70 appeals filed by the Revenue. Although the impugned order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal relates to 70 assessees, the Revenue has filed appeals under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 only in respect of 43 asses- sees. In respect of the remaining 27 assessees, no appeals have been filed. To a query r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d companies, which were all accepted by the Assessing Officer in the respective assessments. Thereafter, on account of search, proceedings were initiated under section 153A of the Act. For easy reference, we may take the facts in Income-tax Appeal No. 41 of 2010. It is agreed between the parties that the decision in Income-tax Appeal No. 41 of 2010 will apply to all the remaining 42 appeals. 5. In Income-tax Appeal No. 41 of 2010, the respondent-assessee had pur- chased 30,000 shares of M/s. Authentic Investments and Finance Ltd. on April 8, 1999, at the rate of Rs. 0.98 per share. These shares were claimed to have been sold on July 7, 2000, July 14, 2000 and July 21, 2000, at an average value of Rs. 33.81 per share. In the assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 9. On further appeal filed by the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tri- bunal by a common order dated July 24, 2009, dismissed all the 70 appeals filed by the Revenue, the lead matter being the appeal against Kamal Kumar Agrawal (individual). Challenging the aforesaid order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dated July 24, 2009, these 43 appeals have been filed by the Revenue and no appeals have been filed in the remaining cases. It is pertinent to note that the Revenue has accepted the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kamal Kumar Agrawal (individual), which is the lead matter. 10. The sole contention raised by the Revenue in these appeals is that the entire long-term capital gains claimed by the assessee represent undi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge by its letter dated May 26, 2005, has confirmed that quite a few of the transactions carried out by Shri Pradeep Kumar Daga were not borne on the records of the exchange and that the details noted on some of the other contract notes did not match. (d) There were unexplained cash credits in some of the buyer's bank accounts prior to issuance of cheques to the assessees. 11. We see no merit in the above contentions. The fact that the assessees in the group have purchased and sold shares of similar companies through the same broker cannot be a ground to hold that the transactions are sham and bogus, especially when documentary evidence was produced to estab- lish the genuineness of the claim. 12. From the documents produced befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in the light of the documentary evidence adduced to show that the shares purchased and sold by the assessees were in con- formity with the market price, the Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that the cash credits in the buyers' bank accounts cannot be attributed to the assessees. No fault can be found with the above finding recorded by the Tribunal. 15. Reliance placed by the counsel for the Revenue on the decision of the apex court in the case of Sumati Dayal [1995] 214 ITR 801 is wholly mis- placed. In that case, the assessee therein had claimed income from horse races and the finding of fact recorded was that the assessee therein had not participated in races, but purchased winning tickets after the race with the unaccounted mone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
