9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of bogus long term capital gains. 2. On the facts and on the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 28,71,564/- on account of fresh unverifiable creditors. 3. On the facts and on the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in misconstruing the remand report of the AO. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, having a proprietary concern in the name of M/s Electro Spare. It is engaged in the business of manufacturing and mainly derives income from doing job work on CNC machines. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. The paper book submitted by the Assessee was vetted by the AO during remand stage. Page No. 37 of the paper book indicates that the demat account of the assessee was with Globe Capital Market Ltd., vide client ID No. 10067256. This contains the copy of the transaction statement for the period 1.4.2002 to 31.3.2004 and indicates that during this period transactions in two equities had taken place. One was pertaining to Chambal Fertilizers Ltd. and the second one pertains to M/s Tech DNA Solutions Ltd.. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that vide transaction no. 6444307, the shares of M/s Tech DNA Solutions Ltd. were credited to the demat account of the assessee on 17.9.2002. Subsequently, vide transaction no. 560339, 10000 s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in on the purchase and sale of 10000 shares of M/s Tech DNA Solutions Ltd. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly observed that the Assessing Officer is misconceived in her conclusions that off market share dealings are not permissible in demat account. Both market and off market share transactions are by law, permitted to be credited to and debited to the demat account. Ld. CIT(A) has also observed that documents also indicate that the transaction(s) cannot be on accommodation entry. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) opined that the assessee succeeds in this ground. In view of the above, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition of Rs. 9,38,920-, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, the same is upheld. 8. With regard t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) while dealing the said issue has referred the Hon'ble Apex Court decision on the similar situation in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) vide para 13 has held as under:- "13. In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assesses. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The Revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
