Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC
Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1463/JP/2018
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1463/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Smt. Neera Mathur, I.T.O., Vs. 52/31, Shipra Nath, Near Metro Ward 2(1), Mas Hospital, Mansarovar, Jaipur Ajmer. (Raj). LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADOPM 3653 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Bafna (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Anuradha (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 19/03/2019 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 27/03/2019 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A), Ajmer dated 03/10/2018 for the A.Y. 2009-10 in the matter order passed U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).
In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for reopening of assessment and also for addition of Rs. 1,74,873/-.
2 ITA 1463/JP/2018 Neera Mathur Vs. ITO
Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in trading of shares and income from other sources. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information that the assessee has reduced its profit by Rs. 1,74,873/- by way of Client Code Modification. From the record I found that during the period under consideration the assessee has carried out F&O transactions on approx 113 days in a year. There were 56 items of losses amounting to Rs. 1,07,23,049.64 and 57 items of profit amounted to Rs. 1,19,28,574.12. The total Turnover of profit and loss was Rs.2,26,51,623.00. Copy of ledger account stock broker was also filed before the lower authorities. The A.O. has doubted about only one transaction of loss of Rs. 1,74,873/-. The assessee client code modification was less than 0.77% of the total trades carried out by the broker during the year. Thus, the error is within the limit of the reasonable margin as per the NSE/SEBI circular and then such an error which is rectified by the brokers as per the facility of Client Code Modification cannot be held as misuse and bogus transactions. It is merely a rectification exercise which corrects the transaction which was wrongly punched in the hand of the client Furthermore, I found that nowhere, the Assessing Officer has given any finding that the assessee and the other parties from whose account, the transactions are treated
3 ITA 1463/JP/2018 Neera Mathur Vs. ITO as transfer of loss are in collusion alongwith the broker. Once the parties are independent and have no relation then doing such transaction within such limited window period of ½ hour after trading hours is not possible. I also found that the client M/s Sandeep Stocks Pvt. Ltd. whose code was modified are not related to the assessee. Normally the question of shifting of loss would arise between the related parties only.
Accordingly, I do not find any justification for the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. Hence, I direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same.
During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has also disallowed 50% of the expenses debited to P&L account which pertains to salary, conveyance, terminal charges, accounting charges and office expenses. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to the extent of 25%. I found that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer was found that most of the expenses were supported by self made vouchers. Keeping in view the allegation of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A), I modify the disallowance and direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance of expenses to the extent of 10%. I direct accordingly.
4 ITA 1463/JP/2018 Neera Mathur Vs. ITO 5. In so far as reopening of the assessment is concerned, I found that there was sufficient reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment, accordingly, reopening of assessment by the Assessing Officer was justified and I uphold the same.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27th March, 2019
Sd/- ¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (RAMESH C SHARMA) ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@ Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27th March, 2019 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellants- Smt. Neera Mathur, Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward 2(1), Ajmer. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1463/JP/2018) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत