Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (8) TMI 505

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... transaction. It is also evident that the assessee has not only invested in the scrip of M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. but has also made investment of huge sum in other scrips as well. The fact that the assessee has not made any off line purchases and has not claimed LTCG but has merely incurred a nominal loss in our view, cannot be a case of doubtful investment in penny stock. AO has also not made any enquiry as to the payments made by the assessee to the recognized broker nor has the A.O. brought on record any material evidence to show that it was a mere bogus transaction except for the information received from DDIT (Investigation) that M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. was a penny stock. Even otherwise, if it is assumed that M/s. Vas Infras .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ious companies by stock exchange through recognized brokers. The assessee had filed his return of income dated 30.08.2012, declaring total income at Rs. 7,68,681/-. The assessee s case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act vide notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 20.03.2019 for the reason that the information received from DDIT (Investigation), Unit 6(2), Mumbai that the assessee has traded in shares of M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. which is alleged to be a penny stock scrip providing bogus long term capital gain (LTCG for short) to various beneficiaries. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed his return of income dated 04.11.2019. 4. The ld. Assessing Officer ('A.O.' for short) vide assessment order dated 26.11.2019 passed u/ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... relied on the order of the A.O. 8. The learned Authorised Representative ('ld. AR' for short) for the assessee, on the other hand, contended that the assessee has been a regular investor in shares and relied on pg no. 61 of the paper book for the details containing the investment made by the assessee in shares. The ld. AR further pointed out the assessee has invested only Rs. 16,53,593/- in M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. during the year under consideration but had made a huge investment of around Rs. 8 crores in various other scrips other than M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. The ld. AR further stated that the assessee has furnished all the details such as the contract notes issued by Lalkar Securities Ltd. along with STT, ledger acco .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CG/STCL. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, observed that the assessee had traded in these shares through online mode through BSE registered broker M/s. Lalkar Securities P. Ltd. and that all the payments have been made through the running current account to the said broker. The ld. CIT(A) further held that all these transactions are STT and brokerage paid which has been duly substantiated by contract notes furnished by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further held that there was no LTCG earned by the assessee in these transactions and only a minuscule loss of Rs. 51,279/- declared by the assessee. 10. From the above observation, we are of the considered view that the assessee has furnished all the supporting documentary evidences to substan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted in alleged penny stock scrip cannot be made basis of addition u/s. 69B of the Act. In the absence of any material evidences to corroborate the information received from DDIT that M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. is a penny stock, we find no justification in upholding the addition made by the A.O. On this note, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Hence, the grounds raised by the Revenue is dismissed CO No. 28/Mum/2023 11. The assessee has filed the cross objection challenging the notice issued by the A.O. u/s. 148 of the Act and the subsequent assessment order u/s. 143 r.w.s. 147 of the Act to be without jurisdiction and invalid. The assessee has also challenged the ground that the ld. CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates