TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which were sold by it during the year and that it was on this basis that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had arrived at a conclusion that there was no reason to hold that the assessee company did not own these shares - there was no reason to hold these transactions to be sham transactions or the credits to be unexplained cash credits – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No.3737/Del/2011 - - - Dated:- 28-6-2013 - UBS Bedi And J Sudhakar Reddy, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Pramod Jain, CA For the Respondent : Mrs Y Kakkar, Sr. (DR) ORDER:- PER : J Sudhakar Reddy This is an appeal filed by the Revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XIX, New Delhi dt. 23.5.2011 pertaining to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 as the assessee failed to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law the CIT(A) did not appreciate that the assessee failed to discharge its onus u/s 68 as held by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s Himalaya International Ltd. (ITA no.1509 of 2006) relied upon by the Assessing Officer. 3. The Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in the circumstances of the case and in law in not appreciating that the assessee has obtained accommodation entry for Rs.23,45,000/- as held by the Assessing Officer. 4. The Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled a paper book running into 118 pages to support his case that the transaction in question is a genuine transaction and referred to the documents in the paper book. He also relied on a number of case laws to support the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In reply the ld.D.R. submitted that this is a clear case where the Assessing Officer has not made any enquiries. 7. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and on a perusal of the papers on record as well as the orders of the authorities below and case laws cited, we hold as follows. 8. The undisputed fact is that the assessee has purchased shares as investments in the earlier AYs and held them as such. This fact that the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 at para 7.1 it is observed as follows. 7.1. The facts are that the assessee purchased two lakh shares at the face value for this year and sold 186550 shares to four persons at par. Thus, there was neither profit nor loss. The sale proceeds were received by way of cheques. The assessee has furnished sufficient evidence to establish the identity of the purchasers. Thus, it can be said that this is not a case of cash credit simplicitor. The monies have been received as sale proceeds, the result of which is that an asset held by the assessee has been converted into money. The Assessing Officer did not make any enquiry from any of the buyers of the shares. The whole evidence was disbelieved without making any enquiry. In such circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had arrived at a conclusion that there was no reason to hold that the assessee company did not own these shares. Therefore, the Tribunal observed that there was no reason to hold these transactions to be sham transactions or the credits to be unexplained cash credits. 6. The findings arrived at by the Tribunal are pure findings of fact and we do not find any error in them so as to warrant interference by this Court. No substantial question of law arises for our consideration and consequently the appeal is dismissed. 10. Keeping in view the propositions laid down in the above decisions, and facts of the case and the evidence produced by the assessee, as well as the fact that the Ld.AO did not cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
