ITO Vs Neetaben Snehalkumar Patel (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act justified as revenue duly exhibited the credit entry as sham or bogus and assessee failed to establish genuineness of the same.
Facts- The case was selected for scrutiny on the ground “suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on shares (inputs from Investigation Wing)”. In the course of assessment, the AO made various enquiries.
Post inquiry, AO issued a detailed show cause notice asking the assessee to explain as to why the total sale value of Rs.33,30,995/- should not be treated as unexplained u/s.68 of the Act. AO, rejected the explanation of the assessee and added the amount of Rs.33,03,995/- under Section 68 of the Act.CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, revenue has preferred the present appeal.
Conclusion- Held that as the Revenue had invoked the provisions of Section 68 of the Act, the onus was squarely on the assessee to prove the genuineness of the credit transaction, which has not been discharged. The Revenue has brought enough materials on record to exhibit the transactions as sham or bogus and the assessee has miserably failed to establish the genuineness of the impugned credit entry appearing in the accounts. Since the exempted LTCG claim of the assesse was only a façade created to conceal the true nature of the credit entry of Rs.33,30,995/- appearing in the accounts, the addition as made by the AO is confirmed.
