Case Law Details
Veena Chaturvedi Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 69C of the Income Tax Act treating share transactions as bogus merely on the basis of statement of the broker is unsustainable and bad-in-law.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the assessee has challenged; firstly, validity of reopening u/s. 147, secondly, addition of Rs.8,29,88,876/- made u/s.68 of the Act disallowing the claim of long term capital gain claimed as exempt by treating the amount received on sale of shares of M/s. Shreenath Commercial & Finance Ltd. as bogus and non-genuine; and lastly, addition of Rs.41,49,444/- on account of alleged unexplained expenditure in the form of commission for taking such bogus accommodation entry.
Conclusion- Held that where the transactions have been made both purchases and sales online and there was no adverse material or information except with some brokers stated in their statement that they have provided accommodation entry in various scrips in one such scrip involved, that does not lead to drawing any adverse inference to treat the share transactions as bogus done through stock exchange.
Once on the same set of facts the Co-ordinate Bench have deleted the said addition, then in the case of the assessee, no different view can be taken. Respectfully following the same, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted including the addition of the alleged commission made under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act was deleted. Thus, the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
