TRIDENT COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-8(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1738/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following the Calcutta High Court's decision in PCIT vs. Swati Bajaj & Ors, held that transactions in penny stock companies for booking capital gains/losses are bogus. The assessee failed to appear despite multiple opportunities.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a short-term capital loss from share trading in ASHIKACR company. The Assessing Officer treated this loss as bogus, identifying ASHIKACR as a penny stock company used for such purposes.

What were the issues?

Whether share trading losses claimed from a penny stock company are bogus and liable for addition. Whether the assessee's failure to appear indicates lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

order : May 01, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.05.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

This appeal was listed on board on 03.12.2019 and thereafter, it has been fixed for almost more than 25 times. Earlier, there was no response from the assessee/appellant to the notices of hearing issued by the Tribunal on various dates. However, on certain dates Shri Somnath Ghosh appeared on behalf of the assessee and requested for adjournments which were accordingly granted. However, from the last Assessment year: 2014-15 Trident Commercial Pvt. Ltd. four dates, no one put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notices sent through registered post as well as electronically at the email address provided by the assessee. Today, the Bench Clerk was asked to contact Shri Somnath Ghosh and appraise about the hearing of this appeal to which Shri Ghosh pleaded no instructions. Since, despite several notices sent to the assessee through registered post as well as served electronically on email, no one has put in appearance, therefore, it can be well assumed that the assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the present appeal. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR.

3.

With the assistance of the ld. DR, we have gone through the record and note that the issue involved in this appeal is relating to the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.7,43,630/- by treating the share trading loss, claimed as short-term capital loss by the assessee, as bogus. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee company had sold the shares of ASHIKACR company and booked the aforesaid loss and the said company was found to be penny stock company created for the purpose of booking bogus capital gains/capital loss by the Investigation Wing. The issue of booking of bogus capital gains/loss in penny stock companies has come into consideration before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Swati Bajaj & Ors reported in [2022] 139 taxmann.com 352 (Calcutta), wherein, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has set aside the order of the Tribunal and confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer in cases of capital gains/loss booked in the penny stock companies treating the said transaction as bogus. The said decision has been further followed in the various decisions of the Tribunal. In the case in hand before us, the company in

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →