SMT. POONAM GUPTA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 5(2)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 627/BANG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 July 2021AY 2015-163 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 dismissed the appeal as the assessee did not appear nor provided any evidence to counter the findings of the lower authorities. The order of the CIT(A) confirming the addition was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared long-term capital gain from the sale of shares of M/s. Jackson Investment Ltd., which was later found to be a scrip suspended by the Bombay Stock Exchange. The Assessing Officer treated the entire sale proceeds as income, a view confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the sale proceeds of shares, which were part of a suspended scrip, could be treated as income under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, and if the capital gains were genuine.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 10(38)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Hearing: 20.07.2021Pronounced: 20.07.2021

PAN NO :ABRPG2342K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : N O N E Respondent by : Smt. R. Premi, D.R. Date of Hearing : 20.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 20.07.2021 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 30.8.2018 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-5, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming addition of Rs.62.09 lakhs being sale proceeds of sale of shares u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, even though the notice of hearing sent by registered post was duly served upon the assessee. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte, without the presence of the assessee.

Page 2 of 3 3. The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee had sold shares of M/s. Jackson Investment Ltd. and declared long term capital gain of Rs.61,73,539/-. The assessee claimed the same as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. The A.O. noticed that M/s. Jackson Investment Ltd. was found to be one of the scrips whose trading was suspended by Bombay Stock Exchange on the direction of SEBI. The assessee had purchased 20000 shares @ Rs.1/- per share in October, 2011 and has sold them at Rs.310/Rs.311 in July, 2014. Since there was huge jump in the sale price of the scrip and since it was forming part of scrips whose trading was suspended, the A.O. took the view that capital gain declared by the assessee is a make-believe transaction. Accordingly, he assessed the entire sale proceeds of Rs.62,09,600/- as income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the same and hence, the assessee has filed this appeal before us.

4.

As stated earlier, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We heard Ld. D.R. who supported the orders passed by the tax authorities. We notice that the assessee has not filed any evidence/material to controvert the findings given by Ld. CIT(A). Under these set of facts, we have no other option but to confirm the order passed by Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th Jul, 2021.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →