9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uantum order and the other against the penalty order - relate to assessment year 2001-02. ITA No.1725/Del/2012 is a recalled matter inasmuch as the earlier ex parte order passed by the Tribunal was subsequently recalled vide its later order dated 8.6.2016. Since both the appeals are based on similar facts, I am proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... explained that the said company was about to come out with public issue, but, eventually, did not due to market conditions. The AO did not accept the assessee's contention of having held the shares as stock-in-trade because the assessee company had never dealt with the shares since its incorporation. Since the assessee invested all surplus funds as per the assessee's own version, the AO treated t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stment' as at the year end. I, therefore, approve the view taken by the authorities below. 4. In the result, the quantum appeal is dismissed. 5. As regards the penalty appeal, it is found that the AO imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of disallowance of Rs.1,80,000/-. The facts narrated above evidently prove that the assessee claimed deduction for decline in the value of shares which it pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
