SHRI HARISINGH HIRAWAT,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD -4(2), CHENNAI

Shri Arjun, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that the assessee invested in shares of public limited company. On sale of such shares, according to the Ld. representative, the assessee claimed exemption under Section 10(38) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The Assessing Officer by placing reliance on the investigation report said to be received from Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata, disallowed the claim of the assessee. According to the Ld. representative, when the assessee invested in the shares of the company, the profit arising on sale of such share is exempted under Section 10(38) of the Act.

On the contrary, Shri B. Sagadevan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee purchased 3500 shares of M/s Concrete Credit Ltd. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee could not disclose the mode of delivery. The confirmation letter filed by the assessee does not bear the date of confirmation. Moreover, copy of Demat account was also not filed. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer concluded that the long term capital gain was a bogus one. On further appeal, the CIT(Appeals) found that the Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata regarding the bogus entries of capital gain on sale of shares of M/s Concrete Credit Ltd. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the CIT(Appeals) has rightly confirmed the disallowance.

We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assesseeadmittedly invested in the shares of M/s Concrete Credit Ltd. M/s Concrete Credit Ltd. is a public limited company registered by the Registrar of Companies. It was also allowed to issue public shares. The Assessing Officer appears to have received information from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata regarding bogus entries of sale of shares of M/s Concrete Credit Ltd. It is not known what is the information the Assessing Officer has actually received. The assessee was not given any opportunity to controvert the said information.

Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessee should be given an opportunity with respect to the information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.