COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. PUSHPA MALPANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Revenue against order of Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, 'Tribunal') dt. long -term capital gain instead of treating it as income from other sources. Assessee originally filed return declaring income of price of shares shot up dramatically within a short span of time. Assessee having not furnished any supporting evidence like balance sheet/final statement of M/s Nageshwar Investment Ltd. proving worth of the company, sale consideration of its shares was liable to be treated as income from other sources.

(2.) SHRI R.B. Mathur, learned counsel for Revenue, argued that it was a case of artificial jacking up of price of shares and broker M/s Ahilya Commercial (P) Ltd., Kolkata through whom shares were purchased, had suffered a bar from SEBI at the time of transaction. CIT(A) and Tribunal both erred in law in deleting additions made by AO under head of income from other sources. There was no justification of their interference with well reasoned assessment order passed by AO. Learned counsel argued that assessee had in fact not made any genuine transaction of shares and converted her undisclosed income into long -term capital gain through accommodation entry of bogus sale consideration. It was therefore argued that substantial question of law arises in this matter whether despite numerous discrepancies pointed out by AO in working of assessee and broker, who was later on banned by the stock exchange for artificially jacking up price of shares, Tribunal/CIT(A) were justified in reversing additions made by the AO.

(3.) UPON hearing learned counsel for Revenue and perusing impugned order, we find that whether or not sale of shares and receipt of consideration thereof on appreciated value is essentially a question of fact. CIT(A) and Tribunal have both given reasons in support of their findings and have found that at the time of transactions, the broker in question was not banned by SEBI at the time of transaction and that assessee had produced copies of purchase bills, contract number share certificate, application for transfer of share certificate to demat account along with copies of holding statement in any question of law, much less any substantial question of law.