Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SH. SHAMIM YAHYA & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA
The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.01.2019 of CIT(A)-14, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No. 89/17-18/CIT(A)-14, New Delhi arising out of an appeal before it against the order dated 18.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the I.T.O., Ward 41(5), New Delhi (hereinafter referred as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the record.
Ranjana Wadhwa 3. At the time of hearing, none has appeared for the assessee. Record shows, notices have been issued earlier on five occasions to the assessee. No more opportunity is justified. Arguments of Ld. DR were heard who supported the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below.
A perusal of the record shows that the Ground raised by the assessee are argumentative in nature, however, the substantive ground arises from the fact that Ld. Tax Authorities below have made an addition of Rs. 2,09,93,738/- with the break up of Rs. 2,03,63,338/- u/s 68 of the Act as alleged bogus LTCG and Rs. 6,30,400/- as commission u/s 69C of the Act. It can be appreciated from the record and the order of ld. Tax Authorities below that in regard to script KAPPAC Pharma Ltd. there was an investigation wing of Kolkata report for which the capital gain of assessee on sale of shares of M/s. KAPPAC Pharma was analysed. Genuineness of transaction claimed by the assessee where doubted. Ld. Tax Authorities had examined the investment of assessee in stock exchange of various parameters including the fact that share were purchased of the market whereas a script was listed in the stock exchange. It will be appropriate to reproduce the factual findings available at page no. 20-22 of the order of the Ld. AO reproduced as under :- “The onus to prove the genuineness of share transactions was on the assessee which she failed to discharge with regard to claim of exemption u/s 10(38) for the following reasons:- i. Assessee purchased shares of a company/script which is devoid of any basic fundamentals and was suspended by the BSE for trading previously as well as afterward. A regular and genuine investor would hardly know that such a company is even listed on BSE. ii. From the Audited financials filed by the company with BSE, It is a matter of fact that the Listed company does not have any significant/real business as seen from its last many P&L accounts and do not have any significant fixed assets or plant