2021 (12) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ral): 1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 7th October, 2019 in ITA No. 1691/Del/2019 passed by the Delhi Bench of ITAT. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,77,25,158/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['Act'] on account of bogus Long Term Capital Gain on penny stock an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Counsel for the Appellant lastly states that the ITAT failed to appreciate that the company did not have much financial worth to justify price hike of its shares. 5. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Tribunal has allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal on cogent grounds. 6. In the impugned order the Tribunal has held that no enquiry had been conducted and the assessee's broker h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reiterated that under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the jurisdiction of the High Court to interfere with the orders passed by the Courts below is confined to hearing on substantial question of law and interference with finding of the fact is not warranted if it involves re-appreciation of evidence. The Supreme Court in Hero Vinoth (Minor) vs. Seshammal, (2006) 5 SCC 545 has also held .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X