TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asset and therefore had decided the issue holding that the assessee was liable to pay capital gain tax. However, in the present case, the assessee had not sold the membership card but had received the amount on account of demutualization of stock exchange and, therefore the facts of the present case are distinguishable from the facts of the case for the Assessment Year 1997-982010 . CIT(A) has also held that the judgement of Stock Exchange Ahmedabad Vs ACIT [2001 (3) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court] apply in the cases where the membership had seized and was surrendered with the stock exchange authorities. We have already held that facts of the present case are distinguishable from the facts of the case in 1997-98. Therefore in view of above, we deem it appropriate to set aside this issue also to the office of A.O. should also enquire from Delhi Stock Exchange or from other members of stock exchange who also must have received similar amounts regarding taxability of such amounts in their cases. The A.O. should also examine the claim of assessee that Delhi Stock Exchange was a charitable organization. Needless - Decided in favour of assesse for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 4799/D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn is filed. In the present case, the assessee has filed the return on 25/07/2008 and as such the AO is entitled to issue the notice u/s 143(2) by 30/09/2009 and the AO has issued the notice within time on 24/09/2009. 4.5. The Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal also was dealing with the similar Issue of notice u/s 143(2) in the case of Amit Jain Vs ACIT Circle- 30(l) ITA No. 309/De1l2010 (A- Bench) for the A Y 2006-07 vide the order dated 30/0612011 and has given the similar contentions raised by the assessee. He has filed the return on 29th July 2007 declaring finding referring to the Board's Circular and has held in Para-2 of the order as under :- As far as the first fold of grievance is concerned, we do not find much force in the contention raised by the assessee. He has filed the return on 29th July 2007 declaring an income of ₹ 2,62,78,928/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under sec. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 16th September 2008, which was duly served upon the assessee on 20th September 208. The proviso appended the sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act has been amended by the Finance Act, 2008. Prior to amendment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of papers which are of 19 volumes 0n 19 different occasions and the same are basically the repetition of the one another. The submissions of the assessee are almost illegible as the same are typed in old type-writer machines and also hand written also along with various simultaneous over-writings. The assessee also relied on the case of Stock \ Exchange of Ahmedabad Vs ACIT, 248 ITR 209 (SC) [2001] in support of his claim. 5.4. I have considered the order of the AO, remand report of the AO and the submissions of the assessee and I do not find any merit in the submission of the assessee. The assessee has been representing his own case and also had been very arrogant in his behaviour while was dealing with the staff of this office and at the same time, losing his cool during the course of appellate -proceedings also. While the high age of the assessee is respected but with age comes maturity and wisdom but it was found during the course of appellate proceedings that the assessee has been rough in his behaviour and used to use rough language while attending this office and while interacting with the officers and the staff and sometime using filthy language also. However, the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 B of the Income-tax Act providing for provisional attachment of all assets to protect revenue in the case of membership which had ceased. This decision cannot, therefore, apply 10 continuing membership. The definition or capital asset under section 2( 14) is wide. The fact that a member has got right of nomination cannot be overlooked. It is only where a member has defaulted in payments that such membership gets forfeited. Liability cannot, therefore, be avoided on the amount received by a member for surrender of his membership in favour of another. 5.7. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, 1 am of the view that there is no merit in the submission of the assessee and the AO has rightly taxed the amount of ₹ 44,00,000/- as long term capital gain and accordingly, the addition made by the AO is confirmed. 3. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The case of the assessee was earlier heard on 20.06.2013, however, due to certain clarifications required by the Members, the case was released for rehearing and on 18.11.2014 the Bench had passed order in the order sheet by which it required certain information f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicability of section 56(2)(vi)(g) after bringing relevant aspects on record? In this regard it is stated that provisions of Section 56(2) (vi)(g) was not applicable in this case because as per provision of section 56(2)(vi)(g) where any sum of money the aggregate value of which exceed 50,0001- is received without consideration, by an individual or a HUF in any previous year from a person or persons on or after 1st day of April, 2006, (but before the 1st day of October, 2009), the whole of the aggregate value of such sum from any trust or institution registered u/s 12AA.shall be exempt. In this case, the assessee has claimed DSE as a charitable organization and the income was treated as exempt u/s 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The submission of the assessee that DSE is a charitable Associates is incorrect because as per definition in clause 2 of DSE Association Ltd. Demutualization DSE Scheme 2005. The Delhi Stock Exchange Associates Ltd. means the company incorporated on June 25th 1947 as a corporate body with limited liability for the purpose of promoting, regulating or controlling the business of buying, selling or dealing in securities as a recognized stock exchange. Hen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Exchange, on account of demutualization DSE scheme 2005, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed this ground of appeal relying upon the earlier order of the tribunal in the case of assessee itself in I.T.A. No. 4645/Del/2009 for Assessment Year 1997-98 which was pronounced on 14.05.2010. However, while going through facts of that case in Assessment Year 1997-98 we find that during that year, the assessee had received an amount of ₹ 25 lacs on account of sale of membership card and, therefore, the Tribunal had held that membership card to be capital asset and therefore had decided the issue holding that the assessee was liable to pay capital gain tax. However, in the present case, the assessee had not sold the membership card but had received the amount on account of demutualization of stock exchange and, therefore the facts of the present case are distinguishable from the facts of the case in I.T.A. No. 4645/Del/2009 for the Assessment Year 1997-98. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee had relied upon the case law of stock exchange of Ahmedabad Vs ACIT 248/2009 (S.C.) which the Ld. CIT(A) had rejected and has followed the tribunal order in Assessment Year 1997-98 in the case of asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
