ITA no. 2464/Del/2019

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Subhash Jain, the appellant, filed an appeal against the assessment order passed by the Income-tax Officer (ITO) for the assessment year 2015-16. The ITO had added Rs. 54,94,000/- under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, treating the sale proceeds of shares as not genuine and denying exemption under section 10(38) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the ITO's order. The appellant argued that the ITO's decision was based solely on the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata, and the assessee was not provided with the relevant documents or allowed cross-examination. The appellant also claimed that he held only 10,000 shares, a small proportion of the total share capital, and the amalgamation of M/s Smart Champ with M/s Cressanda Solution was passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. The appellant cited several case laws in his favor. The Tribunal examined the arguments and found that the ITO's decision was based on the preponderance of probability, and the assessee's arguments were not sufficient to overturn the ITO's order.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the learned CIT(Appeals) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 54,94,000/- u/s 68 of the Act by treating the sale proceeds of shares as not genuine and thereby denying exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Vipul J.Modi, HUF Vs. ITO, Ward 20(3)(1) Mumbai

• Bharti Chirania vs. DCIT, Circle - 23(1)

  Mumbai bench

• Ketan Harilal Mehta vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax-32(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench 'E', Mumbai benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Late Arvind Kumar Kotawal vs ACIT, Circle 70(1), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Mintu Das vs. ACIT, Circle-28, Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• ITA No 450 of 2022 and SA NO 1 of 2024 Ishoo Narang

  Hyderabad bench