Priya Mohan Gurnani Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that receipt of Rs 37 crores of exempt capital gain in a non-descript listed company operated by the accommodation entry provider, who has confessed that he has provided accommodations entries to the beneficiaries, including assessee remanded back to the file of AO for further enquiry.
Facts- The appellant is an individual assessed to income tax. Search and seizure action u/s 132 of the act was carried on 4/2/2016. Therefore the assessment for assessment year 2010 – 11 to 2014 – 15 were carried out by issuing a notice u/s 153A of the Act and for assessment year 2015 – 16 and 2016 – 17 carried out u/s 153A rws 143 (3) of the act. Various additions were made by AO. CIT(A) confirmed the said additions. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Assessee in her family as stated to have received Rs 37 crores of exempt capital gain in a non descript listed company operated by the accommodation entry provider, who has confessed that he has provided accommodations entries to the beneficiaries , including assessee, Confirmed by SEBI in adjudication order for same time in which assessee has sold these shares. In our view, a wanderer who does not know anything about the shares, did not attend any meetings of the companies , even do not know the nature of the business of the company, company is not found at the place where notices issued u/s 133 (6) , invest Rs 1 Cr in 2012 and earns Rs. 10 crores in 201516 [ her family earns whopping Rs 37 Crores] is really a fantastic story.
Held that even if we ignore the original statement given by the accommodation entry provider and his retraction later on, those evidences still remain which needs to be examined, now, independently to ascertain whether the amount of loan taken by the assessee and the amount of long-term capital gain earned by the assessee is genuine or non genuine. In view of the above facts, we set-aside the relevant ground of the appeal back to the file of AO with a direction to the assessee to show the genuineness of the trade and unsecured loan with respect to the documents found as stated in the statement of various parties, exit entry providers details, Demat agencies and the cash trail found.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
01. These are seven appeals filed by the assessee Ms Priya Mohan Gurunani [Assessee/ Appellant] for assessment year 2010 – 11 to 2016 – 17 involving certain common issues emanating from same search. Both the parties submitted that appeals involve common grounds, identical facts and circumstances for all those years. Therefore, the learned authorized representative argued all the matters raising similar contentions, the learned departmental representative also defended the orders of the lower authorities raising similar arguments for all these years; therefore, these appeals are disposed of by this common order.
02. Fact shows that appellant is an individual assessed to income tax. She derives income from salary, house property, business and income from other sources by maintaining regular books of accounts. Search and seizure action u/s 132 of the act was carried on 4/2/2016. Therefore the assessment for assessment year 2010 – 11 to 2014 – 15 were carried out by issuing a notice u/s 153A of the Act and for assessment year 2015 – 16 and 2016 – 17 carried out u/s 153A rws 143 (3) of the act.
03. Status of return filed by the assessee u/s 139 (1) of the Act and u/s 153A of the act in response to the notice is as under :-
