What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the AO had not verified the claim of payments through banking channels. The CIT(A) also failed to verify the bank details submitted by the assessee.

The assessee claimed a loss in derivatives which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer (AO). The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The assessee contended that payments were made through banking channels and supported by documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the loss in derivatives is genuine and properly supported by documentary and banking evidence, and whether the AO and CIT(A) properly verified these claims.

Real Touch Finance Ltd. vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCHES : SMC

Before: SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY

Hearing: 03.04.2017

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata dt.23.06.2016 relating to A.Y.2009- 10 on the following grounds :-

“1. For that the Ld. CIT CA) erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on the alleged grounds.

2. For that the Ld. CIT CA) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.20,61,089/- being loss in derivatives which was duly supported by documentary evidences.

3. For that the Assessing Officer having proceeded only with reference to some reports relating to the transactions in derivatives, the Ld. CIT CA) ought to have properly appreciated the facts & evidences relating to the transactions which resulted in loss and ought not to have confirmed the action of the A.O. who made arbitrary assessment without giving opportunity to cross examine the evidences relied upon by the A.O.

For that further grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be taken at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

Touch Finance Ltd. A.Y.2009-10

After hearing the rival contentions I am of the considered view that the issue in question requires fresh adjudication in accordance with law as the AO has not verified the claim of the assessee of having paid for the transactions in question through banking channels. The assessee has produced details from its bank to demonstrate its case that the transactions in question were genuine and the loss is not a factitious loss. The ld. CIT(A) while recording the claim of the assessee that it has made all payments by cheques to the brokers directly, has not verified the bank details submitted by the assessee.

Under this circumstances, I set aside the matter to the AO with the direction that the bank details furnished by the assessee be verified.

REAL TOUCH FINANCE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments