9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Appellate Tribunal, "E" Bench, Mumbai (the Tribunal) in ITA/6489/MUM/2018 for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in law by not appreciating the fact that Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.4,33,71,468/- claimed as exempted u/s. 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 by the assessee from sale of scrips of Wagend Infra Venture Pvt. Limited was correctly disallowed and added u/s.68 by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the said scrips has all characteristics of a penny stock used for generating bogus Long Term Capital Gains? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted by the revenue is not fully satisfactory, yet this is an appeal under Section 260A of the Act, wherein the Court is required to consider whether any substantial question of law arises for consideration we are persuaded to exercise discretion and condone the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. The assessee preferred an appeal challenging the orders under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Act dated 30.12.2017. The Appellate Authority namely the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 49, Mumbai allowed the appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the same, revenue preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal which has been dismissed. This order has been put to challenge by the revenue in this appeal. 6. Before the CIT(A) the assessee challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d broker ledger account and discharged the onus cast upon the assessee and all those materials were placed in the form of a paper book before the Tribunal. 8. After going through the document the Tribunal held that the assessing officer made the addition solely on the ground that the scrips are in the stock whereas the assessee was able to demonstrate that the shares of the company in which the assessee has invested does not appear in the AIR report of the revenue which related to trading in penny stock. Further the name of the alleged company did not appear in the list of 331 suspended companies and no adverse inference was drawn by the SEBI. 9. Thus, the Tribunal found that the assessing officer committed a mistake which is apparent on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
