POONAM GARG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.

3. The brief facts of the case shows that assessee is an individual who filed her return of income on 30.07.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 7532950/- Page | 1 . The ld AO selected the return of the assessee for complete scrutiny with one of the reason showing suspicious transactions relating to long term capital gain on shares. It was found that the assessee has earned the long term capital gain of Rs. 130386105/- in the long term capital gain of Trinity Trade Link Ltd/ Sharp Trade and Kapac Pharma Ltd. The ld AO found that the capital gain earned by the assessee in both the shares bogus and therefore, passed an order making the addition of Rs. 136100188/- on the account of bogus long term capital gain as well as alleged commission @3% on the same. Consequently, assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the ld AO on 30.12.2016.

4. The assessee aggrieved with the order preferred an appeal before the ld CIT(A). The first ground that was raised was with respect to the challenge to the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act that no such notice was served upon the assessee on or before the time limit stipulated in the proviso to section 143(2) of the Act and therefore, the assessment order passed by the ld AO is illegal. The ld CIT(A) disposed off the above ground vide para No. 5 of his order stating that above ground is general in nature. On the merits while deciding ground No. 2 to 12 of the appeal he confirmed the action of the ld AO with respect to the addition of Rs. 132136105/- u/s 68 of the Act and Rs. 3964083/- u/s 69C of the Act.

5. Before us the assessee aggrieved with the order has preferred an appeal before us and also the stay petition No. 803/Del/2019 in the above appeal requesting the stay of demand. At the time of argument of stay it was submitted that total tax demand of Rs. 6.18 crores has been raised and out of which the assessee has paid Rs. 92.75 lakhs and remaining balance of Rs. 52554690/- is prayed for stay. In the stay petition he submitted that as notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has been served upon the assessee which is mandatory requirement. Such grounds have been raised before the ld CIT(A) which has been disposed off stating it to be general in nature. He further referred to Annexure 15 which is copy of the letter dated 10.11.2016 issued by the ld AO disposing off the assessee objects against non service of the notice. He therefore, submitted that the assessee has raised proper objection before the ld AO. He submitted that as the ld CIT(A) has not