Case Law Details
Mukesh Bhoormal Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Assessing Officer observed that the scrip in which assessee traded was proved to be insignificant, bogus, without business fundamentals and required the assessee to prove the genuineness of the same. In reply assessee vide letter dated 11.12.2017 submitted that the long term capital gain generated was genuine stating the details of section 10(38) of the Act. Not convinced with the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer added the sale proceeds of ₹.5,49,04,773/- u/s 68 of the Act, to the taxable income of the assessee. Assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 28.12.2017 determining income at ₹.5,65,51,920/- by making addition of ₹.5,49,04,773/- u/s. 68 of the Act and ₹.16,47,143/-u/s. 69 of the Act towards the commission paid to entry provider.
Respectfully following identical facts in the case of Shri Amit Mafatlal Shah ACIT in ITA.No.5793/Mum/2019 dated 20.01.2020, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made u/s.68 and u/s. 69 of the Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–30, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 18.07.2019 for the A.Y.2015-16.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
