Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY
आदेश / O R D E R
Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai dated 28.03.2016 in for the assessment year 2006-07 passed U/s.143(3) of the Act.
The assessee has raised the following grounds in his appeal:-
For that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) “CIT (A)" was passed without fully considering the facts and circumstances involved in the case.
2. The Ld. AO and CIT (A) both have erred principally on the nature of the Appellant and contrarily adopted the fact that the Appellant was a trader and the business as non-speculation as against the factual trading of shares without taking delivery on regular basis.
The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the appellant was entitled to claim the carry forward and set-off of the losses incurred in the previous year ended 31st March 2001 Asst Year 2001-2002, which can be carried forward for eight subsequent assessment years.
4. That the CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer, by just relying on the amendment to section 73(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in Finance Act, 2005 by scaling down to 4 years from 8 years with effect from 01.04.2006 i.e. Asst Year 2006-2007, erroneously treating the amendment as retrospective amendment.
That the Ld. Assessing officer's conclusion of assuming that the amendment would take force with the Appellant's assessment for AY 2006-2007 is contrary to the construction of the Amendment enacted in the Finance Act, 2005 which is prospective in nature and applicable from the Previous year 2005-2006 onwards and not to the earlier Previous years.
5. That the Ld. Assessing officer and the CIT (Appeals) have concluded that the appellant's transactions are in the nature of non-speculative in nature is totally contrary to the facts of the case as the Appellant was mostly buying the shares and selling them on daily basis; few shares have been transferred to demat account for want of book closure for statutory compliance purposes by the companies under the Companies Act, 1956. The claim of the Ld. Assessing officer and CIT (A) as afterthought is without considering the records produced during the scrutiny proceedings.
6. For these grounds and such other grounds that may be adduced before or during the hearing of the appeal, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to Hear the case on Merits and pass such orders as the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit.
engaged in the business of trading in stocks and securities, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2006-07 on 30.10.2006 admitting loss of Rs.59,74,503/-. Initially the same was processed U/s.143(1) of the Act and subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice U/s.143(2) of the Act was issued. Finally assessment order was passed U/s.143(3) of the Act on 23.12.2008 wherein the Ld.AO made several additions.
4. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.Revenue Authorities had not treated the gain arising out of purchase and sale of shares as speculative income as claimed by the assessee because at the time of assessment and appellate proceedings, the assessee was not able to provide the appropriate evidence to demonstrate the same. He further submitted that since now the assessee has furnished all the particulars in order to establish the nature of transaction the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld.AO for de-nova consideration. The Ld.DR strongly objected to the submission of the Ld.AR and requested for confirming the orders of the Ld.Revenue Authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials available on record. Though we do not appreciate the reasons cited by the Ld.AR for remitting back the matter to the file of Ld.AO, considering the fact that the assessee has now furnished a Paperbook before us consisting of 191 pages for the first time which Ld.Revenue Authorities on the earlier instance, in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld.AO for fresh consideration acceding to the request of the Ld.AR. We also hereby direct the Ld.AO to admit any fresh evidence produced by the assessee in order to facilitate the assessment proceedings and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with merit and law and in the light of the materials produced by the assessee. At the same time, we also caution the assessee and its representative to co-operate before the Ld.Revenue Authorities in order to expedite their proceedings, failing which the Ld.Revenue Authorities shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with merit and law based on the materials available on record.
In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose as indicated herein above.
Order pronounced on the 15th May, 2018 at Chennai.