Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Smt. Radhika Garg Vs Income Tax Officers (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : ITA. No. 4738/Del./2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/01/2019
Related Assessment Year : 2015-16
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Smt. Radhika Garg Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Conclusion: Where the documentary evidences furnished by assessee clearly supported the claim of exemption under section 10(38) on account of sale of securities that assessee entered into genuine transaction of sale of shares through recognized exchange upon which STT had also been paid and there was no other evidence available on record against assessee so as to make the impugned addition under section 68, accordingly, addition was to be deleted.

Held: During the year, assessee had claimed exemption under section 10(38) on account of sale of securities. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment on the basis of information uploaded by Investigation Wing that “Suspicious Transaction relating to Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares.” Assessee was found one of the beneficiary who had taken accommodation entry. AO recorded statement of assessee under section 131, in which also she had confirmed purchase and sale of the shares in question to earn capital gain. The statement of the broker S was confronted to assessee. However, in her statement she denied having any knowledge about the same. AO did not accept the contention of assessee and held that it was a ‘sham transaction’ which was aimed only to bring unaccounted money in the guise of exempted long term capital gains accordingly, made the addition under section 69. It was held assessee filed copy of the computation, bank statements and details of long term capital gains. The documentary evidences furnished by assessee clearly supported the claim of assessee that assessee entered into genuine transaction of sale of shares through recognized exchange upon which STT had also been paid. AO relied upon statement of Broker to prove that he had provided accommodation entries of M/s. L, in question. However, his statement was not subjected to cross-examination on behalf of assessee. Therefore, such statement could not be read in evidence against the assessee. There was no other evidence available on record against assessee so as to make the impugned addition. Accordingly, addition was to be deleted.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

ITA.No.4738/Del./2018 of the Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad, Dated 28.05.2018, for the A.Y. 2015-2016, challenging the addition of Rs.26,40,725/- under section 69 of the I.T. Act, on account of alleged bogus sale of shares.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031