TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y requirements under the Companies Act. The bank statement clearly reveals that the money has been received through RTGS from the bank account of the purchaser and duly confirmed by the purchaser company who has given confirmation letter filed before the AO and also placed before us. Apart from that, the sale bill and the copy of share certificates clearly show that the shares which were possessed by the assessee had duly been sold to the said party and it is not the case of the AO that these shares are still lying with the assessee. Without any adverse material or inquiry on record that purchaser is non genuine or purchaser has stated anything against the assessee or it has been found in any of the inquiry that the transaction is not genuine. Prima facie there has to be some kind of benefit to the assessee in such dubious transaction or there is some information that any unaccounted money has been converted into sale transaction and is appearing as credit in the books of assessee where such allegations are made against the assessee. If at all there is any loss then it could be in case of purchaser in this case and not the assessee. Accordingly, we do not find any justifiable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re certificates. The assessee also furnished a copy of sale bill no. 1/13-14 dated 08.11.2013 issued by the assessee to M/s Virat Vintrade (P) Ltd., Kolkata for sale of 45000 equity shares of M/s Emporis Projects Ltd, @ ₹ 110/- per share. The assessee claimed that this sum of ₹ 49,50,000/- has been received by him through RTGS in his bank account with PNB No. 5221 on 19,112013 and furnished a copy of his bank account in support of his contention. 3. Thereafter again vide letter dated 15.12.2016 assessee submitted the following explanation/documentary evidence to substantiate the sale of the shares :- i) payment for the shares was made directly to the company on 03.02.2011 from my saving account no. 5221 with PNB Delhi: ii) the shares were subsequently allotted to me by the company on 31.03.2011: iii) the shares were sold to M/s Virat Vintrade Pvt. Ltd [PAN: AAECV0871D) a company on the records of Registrar of companies, Kolkata and which has filed its financials up to 31.03.2016 as per the records; iv) the sale consideration was received on 19.11.2013 from the above company vide RTGS into my saving account no. 5221 with PNB v) the transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as on 08.11.2013, i.e. the date on which 45,000 shares of this company were claimed to have been sold by the assessee, the price of shares of the company was listed at BSE at ₹ 1.02 only as against Rs. Ill claimed by appellant as the selling price. f) In fact, during the entire month of November 2013, the price range of the said share fluctuated around-₹ 1 per share. g) Further, there was trading volume of only 4326 shares on 08.11.2013 as seen from the Stock Exchange records, although the appellant had claimed to have sold 45000 shares on this date. h) The AO confronted the appellant during the assessment proceedings with regard to the above facts noted and as to why this transaction amounting ₹ 49,92,000 shown to have received on share transaction may not be treated as unexplained credit u/s 68 and taxed accordingly. i) The appellant in response did not give any reply to the discrepancies noted and submitted that the entire transaction has been made through banking channels and hence remains verified. j) It was held by the AO that transaction through banking channel is not enough to prove the genuineness of transaction unless corroborat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td., wherein the entire 45000 equity shares of M/s. Emporis Projects Ltd. was sold. It was sold at the same price of ₹ 110 per share. The amount of sale consideration was credited in the bank account of assessee with Punjab National Bank on 19.11.2013 through RTGS. In support of copy of copy of bank statement which was filed before the authorities below, copy of which has been placed on the paper book before us at page 26. Further, confirmation has also been filed as admitted by the AO by the purchaser giving entire details of the purchases made by the said company. 7. Before us Ld. Counsel referring to all these documents submitted that this company still exists and is in the records of Registrar of companies, Kolkata and has been regularly filing its financials and complying with the statutory requirements up to 31st March, 2016. Merely because letter written to M/s. Virat Vintrade (P) Ltd. on 1.12.2016 requiring it to confirm the transaction was not served through postal, that does not mean that the company was nonexistent, when under the statutory records it was still active and complying with all the statutory records. He further submitted that here in this case it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er company who has given confirmation letter filed before the AO and also placed before us. Apart from that, the sale bill and the copy of share certificates clearly show that the shares which were possessed by the assessee had duly been sold to the said party and it is not the case of the AO that these shares are still lying with the assessee. Apparently, without any adverse material or inquiry on record that purchaser is non genuine or purchaser has stated anything against the assessee or it has been found in any of the inquiry that the transaction is not genuine. Prima facie there has to be some kind of benefit to the assessee in such dubious transaction or there is some information that any unaccounted money has been converted into sale transaction and is appearing as credit in the books of assessee where such allegations are made against the assessee. If at all there is any loss then it could be in case of purchaser in this case and not the assessee. Accordingly, we do not find any justifiable reason for confirming the addition consequently the same is directed to be deleted. 10. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22nd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
