TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not showing correct information and in that case the appellant could have revised the return. This is not the case here - details of the purported transaction i.e. purchase of the shares of M/s Radha Swami Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 27.03.2006 for ₹ 2,00,000/- at the rate of ₹ 10/- per share and subsequent sale on 07.04.2007 for ₹ 40,00,000/- indicate that this was an accommodation entry taken by the assessee. Within a short span of holding for just one year, the shares of an unknown company had risen by 20 times. Thus, clearly the assessee had not shown the long term capital gain in the e-filed return of income for AY 2008-09 but it was claimed to have been submitted in the paper return which was not in the form specified under relevant rules. Assessee had purposely done so in order to avoid any scrutiny/ investigation of the transaction. It is therefore concluded that the assessee had not shown any such income in the return of income for AY 2008-09 which has been claimed to have been brought in the capital account for the AY 2014-15. Hence, AO is justified in treating the accretion to the capital account as an undisclosed income. Against the affidavit and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the return and there were many inaccuracies in the return captured by the system. It is observed that the appellant had uploaded e-return on 26-07-2008 and it has been claimed that the same return was filed on 28-07-2008 with the AO. The AO has observed that the appellant had not filed all the paper including computation of income for the relevant year alongwith the return not filed physically / manually. As per Section 139C r.w. Rule 12 which came into force w.e.f. 01-06-2006, provided that the return of income should not be accompanied by any document or copy of a new account or form or audit report etc.,however, it was obligatory on the part of an to file copy of acknowledgement of ereturn with the concerned AO. Thus no computation of income or any return of income claiming deduction u/s 54F had been filed in the eyes of law by the appellant on 28-07-2008. 9. The appellant has failed to explain as to how the e- filed return could not have captured the details of capital gain and claim of deduction u/s 54F. In fact, the data of e-filed return is showing that the long term capital gain filed by the appellant was blank. The claim is proven to be false from the fact that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cal reasons. To this effect, the ld.AR has submitted following written submission. 1. From the facts stated above the two issues arising in the present appeal is whether the amount of ₹ 37,78,270/- can be considered unexplained only because the system generated return for AY 2008-09 is not reflecting the long term capital gain and whether the amount from sale of shares on which the said gain is earned in AY 2008-09 can be treated as unexplained income for AY 2014-15. 2. It is submitted that for AY 2008-09 the assessee has e-filed the return of income on 26.07.2008. The return uploaded through software in XML file contained all the figures including the long term capital gain on sale of shares and the exemption u/s 54F (PB 44) . The assessee also filed the paper return along with the computation of total income on 28.07.2008 which also reflect the long term capital gain on sales of shares of RSBPL against which exemption u/s 54F of ₹ 37,78,270/- is claimed (PB 4-6) . In support of this fact the assessee has filed the affidavit (PB 59) . However, inspite of all these facts available on record, the AO has solely relied on the system generated return which co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Short-term capital gain (3c+3d-3e) 3f 12896 However, this figure of ₹ 12,896/- is shown in Part B-TI, column 4(a)(iii) (PB 14) and in Schedule CYLA, row no. (iv) (PB 22) which shows that data of Schedule CG of the return was not ported in the department software whereas it was filled by the assessee. (f) In Schedule CG, column B3 is showing totally blank (PB 21) whereas it was filled as under:- 3 Other assets for which option under proviso to section 112(1) not exercised a Full value of consideration 3a 4000000 b Deductions under section 48 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th any document. The AO, however, ignored that the rule is for not filing any document along with the e-return filed on the system but the said rule nowhere debarred the assessee to file computation of total income along with the acknowledgment of e-return filed with the AO. In any case when the sale proceeds of shares and the investment u/s 54F are both evident from the bank statement of the assessee for the concerned year, the same cannot be treated as unexplained only because of alleged non-disclosure of the same in the return of income filed electronically. Hence, addition made by the AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) by treating the amount of ₹ 37,78,270/- as unexplained is unjustified and be deleted. 3. The assessee was allotted 20,000 shares @ ₹ 10 per share by M/s Radha Swami Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 27.03.2006. Copy of Form 2 is at PB 61-64 . These shares were sold on 07.04.2007 to 4 companies for ₹ 40 lacs. Copy of sale bills and bank statement where the sale proceeds are credited is at PB 65-69 . The Ld. CIT(A) without any basis has incorrectly held that this transaction of purchase sale of shares is an accommodation entry. 4. Without prejudice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, the assessee vide letter dated 26.08.2016 explained that during the year she has transferred loans advances and the amount of advance tax/ TDS from personal balance sheet to the business balance sheet to the extent of ₹ 1,46,62,649/- which has resulted in increase in the capital in the business balance sheet. The assessee further filed the copy of return and computation of total income from AY 2007-08 to 2014-15 giving the details of gross total income and exempted income aggregating to ₹ 1,52,27,206/- (70,93,124+81,34,082) in support of the capital introduced as business capital. 7.1 The AO, however, vide show cause notice dated 10.10.2016 observed that the system generated return for AY 2008-09 is not showing any long term capital gain. In the return income of ₹ 6,36,857/- has been declared exempt but no income under the head capital gain has been declared and therefore, the capital gain income claimed at ₹ 37,78,270/- should be treated as undisclosed income for the year under consideration. 7.2 In response to the show cause notice assessee vide submission filed on 18.11.2016 (PB 54-58) made detailed explanation pointing out various mistak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed to have been submitted in the paper return which was not in the form specified under relevant rules. The assessee had purposely done so in order to avoid any scrutiny/ investigation of the transaction. It is therefore concluded that the assessee had not shown any such income in the return of income for AY 2008-09 which has been claimed to have been brought in the capital account for the AY 2014-15. Hence, AO is justified in treating the accretion to the capital account of ₹ 37,78,270/- as an undisclosed income. 7.5 It is not imperative to repeat the facts of the case, however, we find that the assessee was was allotted 20,000 shares @ ₹ 10 per share by M/s Radha Swami Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 27.03.2006 and Copy of Form 2 is at PB 61-64 . These shares were sold on 07.04.2007 to 4 companies for ₹ 40 lacs and Copy of sale bills and bank statement where the sale proceeds are credited is at PB 65-69 clearly establish that the transactions are of A.Y. 2008-09. Against the affidavit and copy of online ITR filed in the paper book, the ld. DR has not filed any contrary facts that the contention of the assessee are not correct. Thus, it appears that the Ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
