DCIT 19 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. JAYESH DINESHKUMAR SHAH, MUMBAI

The brief facts relevant for the adjudication of the present appeal are that the Assessing Officer (in short, “AO”), considering that the Assessee sold 386 shares of M/s Prerna Infra Build Limited, which were alleged to be penny stock, treated the entire purchase amount of Rs.1,62,892/- as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and added the same to the income of the Assessee.

The Assessee, thus, being aggrieved, preferred 1st first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, who, vide the impugned order, deleted the addition to the extent of Rs.1,59,275/-, however restricted the addition to Rs.3,617/- under section 69A of the Act.

Thus, the Revenue, being aggrieved, has preferred the instant appeal.

We have heard the parties, perused the material available on record and considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, the Assessee purchased the said 386 shares of M/s Prerna Infra Build Limited in an earlier assessment year and not during the year under consideration. We further observe that no allegation regarding manipulation or rigging of the price of the shares has ever been levelled or established against the Assessee by any investigating agency. It is also an undisputed fact that the Assessee retained the said shares for more than a year and subsequently sold them during the year under consideration.

Thus, considering the aforesaid undisputed facts, the Ld. Commissioner, in our considered view, has rightly deleted the addition of Rs.1,59,275/-, representing the purchase amount of the said shares. We even otherwise find no reason or material to interfere with the findings of the Ld. Commissioner.

Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in totality, the impugned order calls for no interference and, hence, the same is affirmed.

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed.