Balbir Chand Maini v. CIT & Anr.

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2012 TaxPub(DT) 0657 (P&H-HC) : (2012) 340 ITR 0161 : (2012) 247 CTR 0468 : (2012) 067 DTR 0161 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Reassessment--Issue not included in reasons recorded Capital gains on sale of shares --During the course of reassessment revenue found that assessee puchased shares of one company at very low price and about 80 per cent of said shares sold through a broker at very hig rate. Revenue had opinion that the value of the said shares could not be such high and made an addition to income of the assessee as income from undisclosed sourcdes. Assessee contended that the transaction entered into by the assessee was a genuine transaction. Further, it also contended that it was not a ground on which the reopening was initiated under section 148, therefore, there was no justification in making addition on it under section 148. Revenue contended that sale of shares had not taken place through any stock exchange. It was found by the revenue that there were cash deposits in assessee's bank account preceeding the issue of cheques in the name of the assessee for purchase of shares claimed to be the sale proceeds of the same shares received in advance. it was a closed circuit transaction and clearly a structured one. *Held: ,/i>Revenue was justified in making addition on bogus transaction for sale of shares, whcih come to its notice sbsequently in the course of reassessment proceedings though such issue was not incldued in the reasons recorded while initiating proceeding under sedction 147. Income Tax Act,* 1961 Section 148(2) IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL & AJAY KUMAR MITTAL JJ. Balbir Chand Maini v. CIT & Anr. Income-tax Appeal No. 173 of 2007 5 April, 2011 Appellant by : Akshay Bhan and Animesh Sharma, Advocates, Respondents by : Denesh Goyal JUDGMENT *Ajay Kumar Mittal J.* The paper-book of this case has not been received from the concerned branch as the same is said to have been burnt in the fire incident that took place in the premises of this court on the night of 30-1-2011. Learned counsel for the appellant has made available two copies of paper-book to the court for reconstruction of the file. The said copies are taken on record and the file of the appeal is treated as having been reconstructed. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2012 TaxPub(DT) 0657 (P&H-HC) : (2012) 340 ITR 0161 : (2012) 247 CTR 0468 : (2012) 067 DTR 0161

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Reassessment--Issue not included in reasons recorded Capital gains on sale of shares --During the course of reassessment revenue found that assessee puchased shares of one company at very low price and about 80 per cent of said shares sold through a broker at very hig rate. Revenue had opinion that the value of the said shares could not be such high and made an addition to income of the assessee as income from undisclosed sourcdes. Assessee contended that the transaction entered into by the assessee was a genuine transaction. Further, it also contended that it was not a ground on which the reopening was initiated under section 148, therefore, there was no justification in making addition on it under section 148. Revenue contended that sale of shares had not taken place through any stock exchange. It was found by the revenue that there were cash deposits in assessee's bank account preceeding the issue of cheques in the name of the assessee for purchase of shares claimed to be the sale proceeds of the same shares received in advance. it was a closed circuit transaction and clearly a structured one. Held: ,/i>Revenue was justified in making addition on bogus transaction for sale of shares, whcih come to its notice sbsequently in the course of reassessment proceedings though such issue was not incldued in the reasons recorded while initiating proceeding under sedction 147.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148(2)

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL & AJAY KUMAR MITTAL JJ.

Balbir Chand Maini v. CIT & Anr.

Income-tax Appeal No. 173 of 2007

5 April, 2011

Appellant by : Akshay Bhan and Animesh Sharma, Advocates,

Respondents by : Denesh Goyal

JUDGMENT

Ajay Kumar Mittal J.

The paper-book of this case has not been received from the concerned branch as the same is said to have been burnt in the fire incident that took place in the premises of this court on the night of 30-1-2011. Learned counsel for the appellant has made available two copies of paper-book to the court for reconstruction of the file. The said copies are taken on record and the file of the appeal is treated as having been reconstructed.