TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntary evidence, we restore the case to the file of AO to verify the fact. The AO shall verify the fact regarding the dates of purchase, date of transfer, period of holding in accordance with the CBDT Circular No. 704 dated 28.04.1995 and shall grant relief in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose. - ITA No.3006/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 9-11-2016 - SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah (AR) For The Revenue : Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh (DR) ORDER PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: 1. This appeal u/s 253 of the Income-tax Act is directed by assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [for short th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to believe that income to the extent of information furnished has escaped assessment . Notice u/s. 143(2) dated 05.07.2011 and notice u/s 142(1) was issued for seeking various details. The assessee filed objection vide Objection dated 02.08.2011 in respect of notice u/s. 148. The Objection of assessee was disposed of and the assessee was again issued notice u/s 142(1) for seeking certain details, the same was not complied, however, assessee again filed Objection u/s 292BB of the Act alleging there that notice u/s 142(1) r.w.s. 147 is bad-in-law. The objection of assessee was not accepted by the AO holding that the same is not maintainable, as the assessee has already been served notice u/s 148 and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) in prope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 14.12.2011. The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) challenging the re-opening u/s 147 and the addition for denying the exemption of LTCG. In appeal, the ld CIT(A) directed the AO that profit on sale of share be treated as STCG. Thus, further aggrieved by the order of ld CIT(A) the assessee filed present appeal before us. 4. We have heard ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue and perused the material available on record. Ld. AR of the assessee argued that Ground No. 1 to 4 is raised against the validity of re-opening, Ground No.5 relates to confirmation of addition on account of ₹ 63,88,051/- as STCG and Ground No.6 is consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 18.03.2013, the objection on the ground regarding the reopening was rejected, however, on the grounds of addition of denial of LTCG, it was observed from the remand report of AO that details of shareholdings were called from ROC. And as per the details of shareholders on 30.09.2003 the assessee was not the shareholder of Talent Inforways Ltd. The names of assessee appeared on the AGM on 02.09.2004 only. It was further observed by ld. CIT(A) that assessee claimed that share was acquired on 30.05.2003 and the name of assessee was not included in the list of shareholder on 30.09.2003, thus exact date of transfer of share is not ascertainable on the date of documents provided by assessee, thus, it cannot be proved that assessee hold these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
