EVERGAIN SECURITIES (P),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-8(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1830/DEL/2019Status: HeardITAT Delhi25 January 2023AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the original appeal and the Miscellaneous Application subsist, rendering the present appeal infructuous. Therefore, no substantive decision on the merits was made.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. The appeal was listed pursuant to a Miscellaneous Application order which recalled the original appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issues revolved around the validity of reassessment proceedings (Section 147) and the disallowance of F&O business loss and expenditure. The appeal was dismissed as infructuous before these issues could be adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 151,Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA

Hearing: 25/01/2023Pronounced: 25/01/2023

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed towards the order of the CIT(A)-3, New Delhi dated 15.02.2019 pertaining to A.Y.2010-11. 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 1. That under the facts and circumstances, of the case the initiation of proceedings u/s.147 is without jurisdiction, without application of mind, mechanical, on borrowed satisfaction and unwarranted in law as well as on merits.

2.

That under the facts and circumstances, the approval u/s. 151 of Pr. CIT is mechanical non speaking and without application of mind, which approval cannot provide a valid jurisdiction to proceed u/s. 147/148.

3. That under the facts and circumstances, both the lower authorities erred in law and on merits in disallowance the F & O business loss of Rs.20,04,174/- on sale purchase of shares on the ground of alleged manipulative change in Client Code (CCM) by the assessee. 3.1 That without prejudice, the disallowance of Rs.20,04,174/- made without fully confronting the alleged adverse material and without providing for the cross examination of required persons, in unwarranted.

4. That there is no legality, no justification and no basis for addition of Rs.60,125/- by estimating and assuming alleged unexplained expenditure for obtaining alleged bogus F & O loss, at the rate of 3 percent of Rs.20,04,174/-.

5.

That the Ld. A.O exceeded his jurisdiction in examining the issue of disallowance u/s. 14A/Rule 8D as this issue is outside the scope of these 147 proceedings and also not a part of reasons and also since no such material available on record on the basis of which it can be said that it is an escaped income which has come to the notice of A.O. subsequently in the course of proceedings u/s. 147.

5.1 That there is absolutely no legality and justification for disallowing Rs.3,981/- u/s.14A r/w 8D, further more without recording any satisfaction for not accepting the claim of appellant of not incurring any such expenditure.

3.

This appeal has been listed pursuant to the order of this Tribunal in M. A. No.234/Del/2021 order dated 14.10.2022 by which after rectifying the mistake apparent from record inadvertently the appeal was recalled. Since the original appeal with Miscellaneous application subsist, the present appeal becomes infructuous.

4.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the sides on 25.01.2023.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →