9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y adjourned to 25.1.2022. Thereafter, the matter got adjourned to 16.3.2022, 10.6.2022, 15.9.2022, 11.10.2022 and lastly on 22.11.2022. But on none of the occasions, the assessee or his representative attended the hearing before the Tribunal. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte after hearing the ld.DR and considering the material available on record. 3. In the appeal, the assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. In law and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. AO has erred in making an addition of Rs. 4,00,252 on the ground that the appellant had modified Client codes with a malafide intention. 2. In law and in the circumstances of the case the Ld AO has erred in making an addition of Rs.4,00,252 on the ground of client code modification by calculating the profit/loss on notional basis. 3. In law and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. AO has erred in disallowing the speculation loss of Rs. 7,74,799. 4. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is an individual deriving income from business, speculation and other source and having share trading account with Amrapali Capital & Fiancial Services Ltd. (AC&FSL) (Broker). During sea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -. The AO in the assessment order has given details of the transactions by which shifting of above profit and loss has been contrived. When asked by the AO to explain, the appellant could not explain the above satisfactorily. Therefore, the AO added the amount of Rs. 4,00,252/- to the income of the appellant. The present appeal is filed against the above order of the AO. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has reiterated what it submitted before the AO. The main thrust of the argument of the appellant is as follows: (i) The modifications were carried out by the broker to rectify genuine punching errors and no malafide could be attached to the same (ii) The AO has calculated amount of escaped profit/loss on the basis of assumption and no working has been provided regarding price adopted. (iv) The modified transactions are carried out on recognised stock exchange and the persons who are the modified clients must have accounted for the said transactions in their respective books of accounts. In support his contentions, the appellant relied on the judgment of Hon. Jurisdictional ITAT bench of Ahmedabad in the case of M/s. Kunvarji Finance Private Limited [IT(SS)A N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the client code modification carried out by the broker was to rectify genuine punching errors and there was no mala fide attached to the same to show alleged contrived loss/profit to evade tax. While the case of the Revenue was that it had information from search conducted on the broker of the assessee, ACFSL, that the assessee had benefited by indulging in client code manipulation through his broker, and had shifted out of profit of Rs.46,587/- and shifted in loss of Rs.3,53,665/- resulting in net reduction in income due to CCM of Rs.4,00,252/-. When the assessee was asked to submit information and details about the genuineness of the transaction, he was unable to do so before both the authorities, and accordingly the addition of the net benefit accruing to the assessee on account of CCM of Rs.4,00,252/- was added to his income which addition in turn was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. Before me also, nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee to rebut the finding of the Revenue with some material evidence. After going through the orders of both the authorities, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) so as to warrant interference. We find that the Ld.CIT(A) noted the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in both credit and debit side of the ledger account. It was submitted that as per the ledger account, total credit entries came to Rs.7,26,930/- whereas the total of the debit side came to Rs.7,74,798/-, and therefore there was net loss of Rs.47,868/- which should be allowed. In the absence of supporting materials, the ld.CIT(A) was not convinced with the assessee, and accordingly, confirmed the findings of the AO. 12. Before me, the ld.DR relied on the orders of the Revenue authorities, and drew my attention to para 8.3 of the CIT(A)'s order to support his case. "8.3 After considering findings of the AO and submissions of the appellant his ground is adjudicated as under: It is seen that the AO noted that the appellant had claimed speculation loss of Rs. 7,74,799/-. When the AO asked the appellant to file the details for the same, the appellant filed only bills related to F & 0 transactions only. No other details were filed to enable the AO to verify the genuineness of claim of speculation loss. Accordingly, the AO disallowed speculation loss of Rs.7,74,799/ and added the same to the income of the appellant. During the appeal proceedings the main contention of the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
