Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal challenging an order of the CIT(A) which upheld additions made by the AO under sections 68 and 69C. The case involved suspicious sale transactions in shares, where the assessee earned a capital gain from shares of M/s Morya Industries Ltd. The AO noted that the share prices were artificially inflated.
Held
The Tribunal noted that a coordinate bench of ITAT had dealt with a similar issue in the husband's case, deleting the additions. While the Revenue argued that the financials of M/s Morya Industries Ltd. were not examined, the Tribunal felt that for the interest of justice, the matter should be restored to the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the additions made by the AO under sections 68 and 69C for capital gains from share transactions are sustainable when a similar issue was decided in favour of the assessee's spouse by a coordinate bench, and whether the CIT(A) properly considered this precedent and the company's financials.
Sections Cited
68, 69C, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 11.09.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / CIT(A) Mumbai, for the A.Y 2015-16.
All the grounds raised by the assessee relates to challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the Smt. Chandra Devi Prakashmal Jain, Mumbai. additions made by AO u/s 68 and 69C of the income tax act. Therefore, we have decided to take up all the grounds together and to adjudicate the same through the present consolidated order
Ld. AR appearing on behalf of assessee reiterated the same arguments as were raised by him before the revenue authorities and also relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench of ITAT in the case of the husband of the assessee in ITA number 3271/Mum/2023, pertaining to the same script.
On the other hand, DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities
We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, judgements cited before us and the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
From the records, we noticed that the case of the assessee was selected to examine the suspicious sale transactions in shares as the assessee had earned capital gain of Rs.4,244,717/- from the sale of share of M/s Morya Industries Ltd. On examination it was found by the department that the prices of the shares were jacked up Smt. Chandra Devi Prakashmal Jain, Mumbai. artificially from Rs. 22.50 to Rs. 283.55 in 24 months and the entire details of trading in shares have been mentioned in the detailed order passed by the AO.
6. However, it was argued that the coordinate bench of ITAT in the case of husband of the assessee, deleted the additions. On the contrary, it was argued that the financials of the company M/s Morya Industries Limited have not been examined or dealt with.
Be that as it, we are of the view that the orders of the coordinate bench of ITAT in the case of husband of the assessee were available before passing of order by Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, without going into the merits of the claim raised by the assessee, we are of the view that the interest of justice requires that the matter be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh, after considering the order passed by the coordinate bench of ITAT in the case of husband of the assessee and also considering the financials of M/s Morya Industries Ltd., after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
Smt. Chandra Devi Prakashmal Jain, Mumbai. 8. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which should be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12/03/2025