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

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Ishoo Narang, filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2014-15 on 25.07.2014 admitting income of Rs.94,22,920/-. A survey under section 133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted at the business premises of the appellant and other group companies on 15/09/2015. During the survey, it was found that the assessee had invested in equity shares of M/s. Turbo Tech and M/s. Sharp Trading Company for Rs.1,00,000 and Rs.4,25,000 respectively during the financial year 2011-12. In the financial year 2013-14, the shares of M/s. Turbo Tech were sold for Rs.2,30,85,623/- and shares of M/s. Sharp Trading Company for Rs.4,14,90,843/-. The assessee claimed exempt Long-Term Capital Gain (LTCG) under section 10(38) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The case was reopened under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the reasons recorded, and a notice under section 148 was issued on 23.03.2018. The assessee did not respond to the notices issued under sections 148 and 142(1). The Assessing Officer analyzed the share prices and observed that the assessee had involved in the systematic activity of generating LTCG to derive the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, the entire sale consideration received from the sale of shares was treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal.
• 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.6,45,76,466/ made u/s 68 of the Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Arvind Bhaguji Kangane Vs DCIT, Circle – 27(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai benchAY 2016-2017Allowed

• Aditya Baheti vs. ITO

  Jaipur bench

• Sri Hari Prasad Agarwal Vs ITO Ward-46(1), Kolkata

  SMC Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2015-2016Allowed

• Rajkumari Dhanuka

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2012-2013Partly Allowed

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

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

• Ritu Patwari vs. DCIT, CC-4(4), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed