CIT v. Jasvinder Kaur - Taxpublishers.in

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2013 TaxPub(DT) 1876 (Gau-HC) : (2013) 053 (I) ITCL 0235 : (2013) 357 ITR 0638 : (2013) 260 CTR 0069 : (2013) 090 DTR 0056 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Income from undisclosed sources--Addition under section 69Genuineness of share transactions--Assessing officer found that the assessee, during the relevant assessment year, had shown long-term capital gains by selling shares of two companies and as the assessee could not produce any documentary evidence, including demat account, bank statement, etc., in respect of purchase of shares, except showing the purchase of the shares in her balance sheet, therefore, he treated the income derived from sales of shares by the assessee, as her income from undisclosed sources and taxed the same accordingly. According to Commissioner (Appeals), since the shares had been purchased in cash and had not been routed through any stock exchange, the demand of demat account or bank statement, etc., was untenable, but it was illogical to take the view that the value of the shares of the companies concerned would jump to more than 57 times in a brief span of time after considering that the said companies were not financially sound, thus, it upheld the assessment order. Tribunal, however, set aside the orders passed by assessing officer as well as Commissioner (Appeals). *Held:* Not rightly so, as the assessee had failed to prove the onus rested on her to produce necessary materials and convincingly show that the value of the 'shares, as had been reflected in her annual return of income, had gone as high as the assessee had claimed. Therefore, the impugned order suffered from non-application of mind and, therefore, the same needed to be set aside and to be remanded for being decided in accordance with law. Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 69 Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 45 In the Gauhati High Court I. A. Ansari & Indira Shah, J.J. CIT v. Jasvinder Kaur IT Appeal No. 33 of 2010 12 June, 2013 Revenue by : S. Sharma Assessee by : O.P. Bhati, T.C. Das & H.K. Bora ORDER *By The Court :* This is an appeal, made under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act), against the order dated 14-3-2008, passed in ITA No. 51/Gau/2008, for the assessment year 2003-04, whereby the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench (in short, the Tribunal) has allowed the appeal of the assessee-appellant, set aside the assessment order dated 30-3-2006, as well as the appellate order dated 21-1-2008, passed against the assessee. 2. The appeal has been admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the orders passed by the assessing officer as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals) and directing the assessing officer to accept Rs. 18,73,210 as a long-term gain of the assessee from the sale of shares of M/s. Ocean Entrade Ltd. and M/s. United Impex Ltd. ?' SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2013 TaxPub(DT) 1876 (Gau-HC) : (2013) 053 (I) ITCL 0235 : (2013) 357 ITR 0638 : (2013) 260 CTR 0069 : (2013) 090 DTR 0056

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Income from undisclosed sources--Addition under section 69Genuineness of share transactions--Assessing officer found that the assessee, during the relevant assessment year, had shown long-term capital gains by selling shares of two companies and as the assessee could not produce any documentary evidence, including demat account, bank statement, etc., in respect of purchase of shares, except showing the purchase of the shares in her balance sheet, therefore, he treated the income derived from sales of shares by the assessee, as her income from undisclosed sources and taxed the same accordingly. According to Commissioner (Appeals), since the shares had been purchased in cash and had not been routed through any stock exchange, the demand of demat account or bank statement, etc., was untenable, but it was illogical to take the view that the value of the shares of the companies concerned would jump to more than 57 times in a brief span of time after considering that the said companies were not financially sound, thus, it upheld the assessment order. Tribunal, however, set aside the orders passed by assessing officer as well as Commissioner (Appeals). Held: Not rightly so, as the assessee had failed to prove the onus rested on her to produce necessary materials and convincingly show that the value of the 'shares, as had been reflected in her annual return of income, had gone as high as the assessee had claimed. Therefore, the impugned order suffered from non-application of mind and, therefore, the same needed to be set aside and to be remanded for being decided in accordance with law.

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 45

In the Gauhati High Court

I. A. Ansari & Indira Shah, J.J.

CIT v. Jasvinder Kaur

IT Appeal No. 33 of 2010

12 June, 2013

Revenue by : S. Sharma

Assessee by : O.P. Bhati, T.C. Das & H.K. Bora

ORDER

By The Court :

This is an appeal, made under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act), against the order dated 14-3-2008, passed in ITA No. 51/Gau/2008, for the assessment year 2003-04, whereby the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench (in short, the Tribunal) has allowed the appeal of the assessee-appellant, set aside the assessment order dated 30-3-2006, as well as the appellate order dated 21-1-2008, passed against the assessee.

2. The appeal has been admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law :

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the orders passed by the assessing officer as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals) and directing the assessing officer to accept Rs. 18,73,210 as a long-term gain of the assessee from the sale of shares of M/s. Ocean Entrade Ltd. and M/s. United Impex Ltd. ?'