M/s. Rajat Finvest, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

CO 316/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0498 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K SAMPATH ADV ANEESH MITTAL; SHREYA SHARMA A
• Assessee Lawyers: SULEKHA VERMA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Business income; Income from undisclosed sources; Deemed to accrue or arise in india; Cost of acquisition; Date of conversion; Accommodation entries

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.AS NO.4731, 4732 & 4733/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 ITO, WARD-46(1), NEW DELHI. VS. RAJAT FINVEST, 5585, 2 ND FLOOR, LAHORI GATE, DELHI. TAN/PAN: AAJFR 3382B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) COS NO. 314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 RAJAT FINVEST, 5585, 2 ND FLOOR, LAHORI GATE, DELHI. VS. ITO, WARD-46(1), NEW DELHI. TAN/PAN: AAJFR 3382B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SMT. SULEKHA VERMA, SR.D.R. RESPONDENT BY: S/SHRI K SAMPATH, ADV., ANEESH MITTAL, ADV. & SHREYA SHARMA, ADV. DATE OF HEARING: 17 07 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 09 2019 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: THE AFORESAID APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENU E AND CROSS OBJECTIONS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST SEPARA TE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF EVEN DATE, 29.06.2016, PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVI, NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S.143(3)/147 FOR THE I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 2 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. SINCE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS ARE COMMON, ARISING OUT OF IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS, THEREFORE, SAME WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLIDATED O RDER. 2. AS A LEAD CASE, WE ARE TAKING UP THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND THE FINDING GIVEN THERE IN WILL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS IN ALL THE CASE, BECAUSE THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT (A) ARE EXACTLY S AME PERMEATING OUT OF SAME SET OF FACTS. IN THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITIO N OF RS.37,41,79,914/- HELD TO BE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AGAINST TREATING IT SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AS DEEMED INCOME U/S.68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 . 2. WHEREAS IN THE CROSS OBJECTION, ASSESSEE HAS CHA LLENGED THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING U/S.147. 3. THE FACTS IN BRIEF QUA THE ISSUE INVOLVED ARE THAT, ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSIN ESS OF TRADING IN SHARES AND MAKING INVESTMENT IN SHARES. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOW N SALES FROM SHARES HELD IN STOCK-IN-TRADE AT RS.18,18,09,3 03/- AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF M/S. REI AGRO L TD. OF RS.37,41,74,914/-, WHICH WAS HELD IN INVESTMENT POR TFOLIO. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN COST OF ACQUISITION OF THESE SHARES AT RS.9,75,37,736/- AND FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION ON SALE OF I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 3 SUCH SHARES WERE DECLARED AT RS.47,17,12,650/-. THE SE SHARES WERE PURCHASED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-0 8 AND WERE SOLD DURING THE YEAR. THE SUMMARY OF SHARE TRA NSACTION WITH THE DATE OF PURCHASE AND SALE ARE AS UNDER: S.NO NAME OF COMPANY SALE NET VALUE PURCHASE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN QTY DATE VALUE QTY DATE VALUE 1 REI AGRO LIMITED 2000 05.02.08 216410.98 216,410.98 2000 1 8 01 07 4,15092.05 1691318.93 2 REI AGRO LIMITED 2000 05,02.08 2107976.09 2000 18.01.07 415092.05 1692884.04 3 REI AGRO LIMITED 235000 06.02.08 233766328.42 26312 21906 11950 15000 89728 70104 18 01 07 19.01.07 19.01.07 22.01.07 23.01.07 23.01.07 5460951.04 4616916 93 2527979.52 3136174 10 18237159.52 1425821 8.45 185528928.86 235000 48237399.56 4 REI AGRO LIMITED 235000 06.02.08 233731934.97 16571 57910 20000 100000 10000 30519 23.01.07 24.01.07 24.01.07 25.01.07 29.01.07 31.01.07 3370320.35 11852894.17 4101276 08 20661298.36 2102086.65 6382277.18 185261782.18 235000 48470152.79 TOTAL 474000 471712650.46 216410.98 474000 97537736.45 374174914.01 3. THE SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD. AT THE TIME OF PURCH ASE AND SALE WAS A LISTED COMPANY IN STOCK EXCHANGE AND THE SHARES HAVE BEEN PURCHASED AND SOLD AT THE PREVAILING RATE OF THE DAY QUOTED IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE AND ALL THE TRANSA CTIONS HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH BROKER, INDIA BULLS SECURITI ES LTD. I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 4 THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS REOPENED U/S.147 ON THE BAS IS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIT (INV.) THAT ASSESSEE- FIRM IS INTRODUCING UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE GUISE OF BOGU S LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN TO THE TUNE OF RS.37,14,74,914/-, RS.2,29,30,711/- AND RS.59,24,97,148/-, IN F.YS. 20 07-08, 2008-09 AND 2009-10, RESPECTIVELY. 4. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148, ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 7.12.2013 AND STATED THAT EARLI ER RETURN FILED ON 27.09.2008 TO BE TREATED AS RETURN FILED I N RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S.148 AND THE SAID RETURN WAS FILED AG AIN BY WAY OF E-FILING. AFTER RECEIVING THE REASONS RECORDED THE ASSESSEE RAISED OBJECTION FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT, WHIC H HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE LETTER DATED 24.02.2014. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS NOTED THAT A SURVEY U/S.133A WAS CARRIED OUT ON 07.08.2012 IN THE CASE OF M/S. REI AGRO LTD. BY THE INVESTIGATION WING AND STATEMENT OF ONE OF THE EMPL OYEE REI AGRO GROUP, SHRI BRIJ MOHAN VYAS, WAS RECORDED. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT AS INCORPORATED I N THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER, BECAUSE T HIS WAS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER T O DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCE:- Q.10 DO YOU PERFORM ANOTHER ROLE IN THE GROUP COMP ANIES OF SH. SANDEEP JHUNJHUNWALA? ANS. I AM WORKING IN M/S OCTAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD. ONLY, BUT IF SH. SANDEEP JHUNJHUNWALA DEPUTE ME FOR SOME OTHER WORK I HAVE TO DO IT. I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 5 Q.16 THERE IS BBM MESSAGE RECEIVED IN YOUR BLACKBER RY PHONE AT 10.22 AM ON 26-07-2012 FROM SKJINTL. I AM SHOWING Y OU THE MESSAGE RECEIVED BY YOU AND THE REPLY SENT BY YOU O N THE SAME DATE AT 10.27 A.M. PLEASE GO THROUGH THE MESSAGE AND CON FIRM THE SAME AND ANSWER FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:- A) WHO IS SKJINTL'? B) IN WHAT CONTEXT MESSAGE WAS SENT TO YOU? C) WHAT IS SHAILINI ACCOUNT AS SHOWN IN YOUR REPLY ? ANS. YES I CONFIRM THAT I HAVE RECEIVED THE MESSAGE AS STATED BY YOU ABOVE ON THE TIME AND DATE AS EXPLAINED ABOVE ON MY BLACKBERRY PHONE. A) 'SKJINTL' MEANS SH. SANDEEP KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA. HE HAS SENT THESE MESSAGES. B) HE HAS ASKED TO BUY THE SHARES OF REI AGRO FROM SHAILINI ACCOUNT AND I HAVE PURCHASES THE SAME. C) THE SHALINI ACCOUNT MEANS SHAILINI METALS PVT. L TD. IT BELONGS TO MR. MANOJ JADONE. I ASKED MR. MANOJ JADONE TO PURCHASE THOSE SHARES AND HE AGREED TO DO SO. Q.17 AS DISCUSSED IN QUESTION NO. 16, THERE ARE A N UMBER OF MESSAGES RECEIVED FROM SKJINTL I.D. ON YOUR BBM. IN ALL THESE MESSAGES THERE ARE VARIOUS INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN TO YO U FOR EITHER PURCHASE OR SELL OF SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD. AND REI 6 TEN LTD. IN ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS BROKERS AND GROUP COMPANIES. ON PERUSAL OF THESE MESSAGES IT IS SEEN THAT INSTRUCTIONS ARE VERY FREQ UENT ANSWER FOLLOWING QUESTION:- A) WHY THESE INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN TO YOU ONLY? B) WHAT IS THE REASON THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE S O FREQUENT? C) IT IS LEARNT THAT ABOVE DISCUSSED TWO COMPANIES ARE LISTED COMPANIES THEN HOW PRICE OF SHARES ARE DECIDED BY S KJINTL? I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 6 D) IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE INSTRUCTIONS THAT TRANS ACTIONS ARE BELONG UNDERTAKEN IN GROUP COMPANIES ACCOUNT AND BROKER'S ACCOUNT OF GROUP COMPANIES. IN THIS CONTEXT PLEASE EXPLAIN THE PURPO SE BEHIND SUCH TRADING. ANS. YES I CONFIRM THAT I HAVE RECEIVED THE MESSAGE S AS STATED ABOVE. THE POINT WISE REPLY OF ABOVE QUESTION ARE AS UNDER : A) I AM TRUSTED AIDE OF SH. SANDEEP JHUNJHUNWALA AND T HE SOLE PERSON TO WHOM HE GIVES DIRECTIONS FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD AND REI 6 TEN LTD. IN ACCOUNT OF VARIO US BROKERS AND GROUP COMPANIES. B) WHENEVER HE THINKS RIGHT TIME TO BUY OR SELL THE SH ARES OF SUCH COMPANIES, HE GIVE SUCH INSTRUCTIONS TO ME. C) THE COMPANIES HAVE ISSUED RIGHT ISSUES AT RS. 19.50 /-. NOW THE RATE IS DOWN SO WE ARE INCREASING OUR PROMOTER'S ST AKE. WE CONTROL AND DRIVE UP THE PRICE OF SHARES OF MAINTAIN THE RA TES FOR THE INTEREST OF SHAREHOLDERS/INVESTORS. D) WE DO SO TO MAINTAIN THE RATE OF SHARES. Q.18 FROM THE RESPONSE GIVEN AT Q.NO. 17 ABOVE, I T CAN BE CONCLUDED THAT THE TRADE VOLUME EFFECTED DURING VARIOUS TRANS ACTION IN SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD. THROUGH THE GROUP COMPANIES AND BROKE RS IS MORE THAN 5% NORM OF SEBI. PLEASE CONFIRM THE SAME. ANS. IT IS UNDER 5% AS PER NORMS. THE OTHER CONCERN S WITH WHOM WE ARE INTERACTING WITH, ARE NOT WITHIN OUR CONTROL. B UT WE ARE INFLUENCING THEM TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF INVESTORS & SHAREHO LDERS.' 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD MADE TRANSACTION OF SHARES OF 6 GUJARAT BASED COMPANIES THROUGH BROKERS AND THESE COMPANIES HAVE INCURRED HUGE LOSSES ON PURCHASE OF SHARES OF M/S. REI GROUP. DETAIL OF THESE COMPANIES WHO HAVE INCURRED LOSSES ON I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 7 ACCOUNT OF SHARE TRADING RIGHT FROM THE FINANCIAL Y EARS 2008- 09 TO 2011-12 HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED IN PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT THES E COMPANIES DID NOT HAVE SUBSTANTIAL CAPITAL AS APPEA RING IN THE BALANCE-SHEET EXCEPT FOR UNSECURED LOAN TAKEN F ROM M/S. JAIN POLY FILMS LTD. AND ALSO THE UNSECURED LOAN TA KEN FROM THESE COMPANIES. HE AGAIN NOTED THAT THE MONEY IN T HE BALANCE SHEET OF M/S. JAIN POLY FILMS LTD. IS COMIN G IN THE FORM OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM KOLKATA BASED COMPANY M /S. TRIPTI MERCHANT PVT. LTD. AND BASED ON THIS HE HAS TRIED TO DRAW A FUND FLOW STATEMENT. 6. HE HAS ALSO REFERRED TO THE REPORT OF INVESTIGAT ION WING, GANDHIDHAM IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:- 11.. THE INVESTIGATION WING, GANDHIDAM IN ITS REPO RT DATED 31-01-2013 HAS REPORTED THAT SH. MANOJ SINGH JADOUN IS THE ACTING DIRECTOR IN M/S JAIN POLY FILM PVT. LTD., M/S GRAND FAYRE IMPEX PVT. LTD, M/S RIPPLE BRINE-CHEM PVT. LTD, M/S VRAJ SERVI CES PVT. LTD, M/S DHAVANI TEXTILE PVT. LTD, M/S JUMP EXPORT PVT. LTD. AND M/.S RAK JIG TEXTILES PVT. LTD AND ALL THESE COMPANIES A RE GROUP CONCERNS. IT IS FURTHER REPORTED THAT SH. MANOJ SIN GH JADOUN WAS CONFRONTED WITH ABOUT THE TRANSACTIONS MADE WITH RE I AGRO LTD. I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 8 AND WAS ASKED WHY ANY COMPANY WOULD GIVE UNSECURED LOANS WITHOUT ANY COLLATERAL TO WHICH HE REPLIED THAT HE IS KNOWN TO SH. SURESH AGARWAL, DIRECTOR OF M/S TRIPTI MERCHANT PVT . LTD. THE INVESTIGATION WING, GANDHIDHAM HAS FURTHER REPORTED THAT SH. MANOJ SINGH JADOUN WAS ASKED ABOUT THE REASON FOR P URCHASE OF SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD. AT VERY HIGH PRICES AND CON SEQUENTLY SUFFERING HUGE LOSSES, TO WHICH HE STATED THAT HIS COMPANIES HAD TAKEN ADVICE FROM DIRECTOR OF M/S TRIPTI MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. REGARDING INVESTMENTS TO BE MADE IN SHARES IN RETUR N THEY ARE BEARING LOSSES WITH HIS COMPANIES. 7. HE HAS ALSO INCORPORATED THE STATEMENT OF SHRI M ANOJ SINGH JADOUN AND HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT NO INFOR MATION WAS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S.133(6) TO PR OVIDE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PARTIES TO/FROM SHARES OF M /S. REI GROUP WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD DURING THE YEAR. THER EAFTER, HE TREATED THE ENTIRE TRADING IN SHARES AND RESULT IN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS BOGUS AND TREATED AS A DEEMED INCOME U/S.68. 8. THEREAFTER, ON ONE VERY IMPORTANT OBSERVATI ON MADE BY THE AO IS THAT, DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED TRADING IN SHARES OF M/S. REI AGRO LTD AND HAS ALSO TRANSFERRED ITS SHARES OF M/S. REI AGRO LTD FR OM OPENING STOCK AND WAS CONVERTED INTO INVESTMENT. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IT WAS NOT SHOWN AS TO HOW SHARES WERE TRANSFE RRED IN INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AND ON WHAT RATE. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER THEN ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AND IN RESPONSE THE A SSESSEE HAS FILED THE COPY OF AUDITED ACCOUNT FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08, FROM WHERE AO NOTED THAT NO INVESTMENT IN SHARES I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 9 HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE AS INCORPORATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER RE ADS AS UNDER:- 'THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS DOING BUSINESS AS WELL AS IN VESTMENT ON LONG TERM BASIS IN AY '-08 AND THEREAFTER. THE ASSE SSEE FIRM WAS MAINTAINING BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSE SSEE FIRM WAS MAINTAINING BOOKS ACCORDINGLY. IN THE FINALIZATION OF BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT & LOSS A/C AND IN PREPARATION OF RETURN THE PURCHASES AND STOCK IN HAND ALONGWITH INVESTMENT STOCK IN HAND HA S BEEN CONSOLIDATED WRONGLY. IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 (AY 2007-08), THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE SEPARATE LEDGE A/C'S IN RESP ECT OF FOLLOWING: PURCHASE (INVESTMENT) A/C RS.13,38,77,3 37.66 PURCHASES RS. 27,84,14,870.14 RS.41,22,92,207.80 LESS: SERVICES CHARGES RS. 37,370.67 RS.41,22,54,837.13 THE SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD PURCHASE A/ C'S IN PROFIT & LOSS A/C WRONGLY. COPIES OF PROFIT & LOSS A/C AND B ALANCE SHEET FOR THE F. Y 2006-07 ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH. FURTHER, TH E STOCK IN HAND (TRADING) AS WELL AS STOCK INVESTMENT A/C HAS BEEN WRONGLY MERGED AS FOLLOW:- STOCK IN HAND (TRADING) RS.16,66,59,460.93 STOCK (INVESTMENT) RS.13,38,77,337.75 RS.30,05,36,798.68 HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS RECTIFIED IN F. Y 2007-08(AY 2008-09) THROUGH REFLECTING IN PROFIT & LOSS A/C UNDER THE HEADING O PENING STOCK, HENCE, THERE IS NO CONVERSION OF STOCK-IN TRADE INT O INVESTMENT AC/ BUT RECTIFICATION OF ERROR ALREADY MADE. I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 10 ALTHOUGH IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, THE SHARES WOR TH RS. 6,92,70,422/- SHOWN AS STOCK- IN-TRADE HAS BEEN CON VERTED INTO INVESTMENT A/C THROUGH DEDUCTION FROM PURCHASES. DE TAILS OF SUCH CONVERSION IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. THE SHARES CONVERTED DURING THE YEAR HAVE NOT BEEN SOLD DURING THE YEAR CONCERNED AND HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN INVESTMENT STOCK IN HAND AS ON 31/3/2008. HENCE THERE WAS NO GAIN ON THIS IN TH E YEAR CONCERNED. EVEN THESE SHARES CONVERTED FROM STOCK I N TRADE TO INVESTMENT HAVE NOT BEEN SOLD IN AY 2009-10. HENCE, TREATING THESE GAIN IN AY 2010-11 CANNOT BE TERMED AS SHORT TERM C APITAL GAIN AS HOLDING OF SHARES WERE MORE THAN ONE YEAR. ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN, BUT I F WE CONSIDERED THE INCOME TAX PROVISIONS AND JUDGMENTS IN RESPECT OF C ONVERSION OF STOCK- IN-TRADE TO INVESTMENT EVEN THOUGH CONVERSION DATE IS TAKEN ON 01/04/2007. A) THERE IS SPECIFIC PROVISION U/S 45(1) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE TREATMENT OF VALUE/DATE FOR CONVERSION OF CAPIT AL ASSET INTO STOCK- IN-TRADE, BUT THERE IS NO SPECIFIC PROVISION UNDER INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 FOR VICE VERSA I.E. CONVERSION OF STOCK IN TRADING INTO CAPITAL ASSET. B) WHEN THERE IS NO SPECIFIC PROVISIONS FOR CONVER SION OF STOCK IN TRADE INTO CAPITAL ASSET, THEN THE QUESTION ARISES WHAT I S COST OF ACQUISITION I.E WHETHER THE COST OF CAPITAL ASSET IS THE COST O F ASSET WHEN ACQUIRED OR THE FAIR VALUE OF CAPITAL ASSET ON THE DATE WHEN IT IS CONVERTED FROM STOCKIN-TRADE TO CAPITAL ASSET. FURTHER WHAT WILL BE THE DATE OF ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL ASSET I.E. WHETHER THE DATE OF ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL ASSET IS THE DATE WHEN THAT ASSET IS ACQUIR ED OR WHEN THE ASSET IS CONVERTED INTO CAPITAL ASSET. 9. NOT SATISFIED WITH THE ASSESSEES REPLY, HE HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS HAVING A STOCK DURING THE FINANCIAL YEA R 2006-07 AMOUNTING TO RS.13,38,77,337/- IS NOT BORNE OUT AND EVEN I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 11 THERE WAS A MISTAKE, THE SAME HAVE BEEN RECTIFIED E ARLIER AND ACCORDINGLY, HE HELD THAT THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAI N SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE TREATED AS SHORT TERM CAP ITAL GAIN ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT HAVING ANY OPENI NG STOCK IN THE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AS ON 01.04.2007 AND HO W STOCK- IN-TRADE WAS CONVERTED INTO INVESTMENT DURING THE Y EAR, AND THEREFORE, PERIOD OF HOLDING OF INVESTMENT HAS TO B E RECKONED AS LESS THAN A YEAR AND ACCORDINGLY ASSESSEE IS TAX ABLE AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. HOWEVER, HE HELD THAT, SIN CE, HE HAS ALREADY MADE THE ADDITION TREATING THE LONG TERM CA PITAL GAIN AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCE U/S.68, THER EFORE, HE IS NOT PROCEEDING TO MAKE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT O F TREATING THE TRANSACTION OF SHARES AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAI N. 10. LD. CIT (A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS ON RECORD AND MATERIAL PRODUCED BEFORE HIM HAS DELETED THE SA ID ADDITION BY HOLDING THAT THE SALE OF SHARES OF M/S. REI AGRO LTD. WAS GENUINE. THE MAIN CONCLUSION AND FINDING O F THE LD. CIT (A) IS READS AS UNDER:- THE APPELLANT, HAS IN THE NUTSHELL ARGUED, THAT AL L EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION WITH RESPECT TO S ALE OF SHARES HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTES , INVOICES AND COPIES OF ACCOUNTS OF THE BROKERAGE FIRM HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED. THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN THROUGH ACCREDITED BROKERAGE FIRM, THE SALE CONSIDERATION AS MOVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS THE SHARES HAVE BEEN QUOTED AS NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE AND HAVE BEE N TRANSACTED AS PER THE PRICE ON THAT DATE. FURTHER THE BROKER HAS CHARGED SECURITIES TRANSACTION TAX ON THESE TRANSACTIONS. ON THE OTHE R HAND THE I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 12 ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CONTROVERT A NY OF THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AS A VERY STRONG SUSPICION WITH REGARD TO GENUINENESS OF THE SHARE T RANSACTION AND EARNING OF CAPITAL GAIN. BUT HOWEVER STRONG A SUSPI CION MAY BE IT CANNOT DISLODGE THE EVIDENCE AVAILABLE. THE WHOLE C ASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BASED ON THE STATEMENT OF ONE SH. BRIJ MOHAN VYAS. BUT EVEN HIS STATEMENT CANNOT ERASE THE EVIDE NCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BEEN A BLE TO PLACE ON RECORD ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCE WHICH COULD PROVE CONC LUSIVELY THAT THE SALE OF SHARES OF M/S RE1 AGRO LTD AND M/S RE1 SIX TEN LTD ARE BOGUS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRA RY, THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT WITH RESPECT TO SALE OF SHARES OF M/S RE1 AGRO LTD, IS HELD TO BE GENUINE. 11. ON THE ISSUE OF ALTERNATIVE CONCLUSION THAT THE PERIOD OF HOLDING INVESTMENT HELD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS LESS THAN A YEAR, HE AFTER INCORPORATING THE DATE OF PURCHASE AND DATE OF SALE HELD THAT, CLEARLY THE SHARES WERE HELD FOR MO RE THAN A YEAR, AND THEREFORE, ASSESSEE HAS RIGHTLY SHOWN AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. 12. BEFORE US, LD. CIT-DR STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HELD THAT THERE WAS AN IN FORMATION BY THE INVESTIGATION WING AS TO HOW THE PRICE OF SH ARES OF REI AGRO LIMITED WAS MANAGED AND LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT GIV EN ANY DETAILED FINDING WITH REGARD TO EACH AND EVERY OBSE RVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE ALSO STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE VARIOUS JUDGMENTS IN HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSION. HOWEVER, THESE JUDGMENTS ARE NOT REFERRED TO OR RELIED UPON AS MANY AS 17 JUDGMENTS AND FURTHER THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREM E I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 13 COURT IN THE CASE OF DURGA PRASAD MORE, 82 ITR 540 AND SUMATI DAYAL, 214 ITR 801 AND CATENA OF OTHER DECIS IONS. ALL THESE JUDGMENTS ARE NOT BEING DISCUSSED, FIRSTLY, FO R THE REASON THAT MOST OF THE JUDGMENTS ARE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT RELATING TO SHARE CAPITAL/SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WHICH HAS NO RELEVANCE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 13. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND SUBMIT TED THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL FOR ANY COLLUSION BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND THE COMPANY WHOSE SHARES HAVE BEEN TRANSACTED. EVEN HEAVY RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON THE STATEMENT OF SHRI BRIJ MOHAN VYAS, AN EMPLOYEE OF A COMPANY IS MOSTLY GENERAL AND NO INCRIMINATING OR ADVERSE I NFERENCE CAN BE DRAWN FROM SUCH STATEMENT. MOREOVER, NO DEPO SITION HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE PURCHAS ES HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH STOCK EXCHANGE AND ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE SHARES IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR S WHICH WAS DULY DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND WERE PURCHASED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES. IF ASSESSE E IS A TRADER IN SHARES AND HAS DEALT IN THOUSANDS OF SCRI P, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT FOR ONE PARTICULAR SCRIP, ASSESS EE WAS INVOLVED IN SOME BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THE ASS ESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ALL THE DETAILS OF PURCHASES MADE THR OUGH STOCK EXCHANGE, LIKE CONTRACT NOTES, INVOICES, COPI ES OF ACCOUNT OF BROKER FIRM AND ALSO HOW THE PURCHASES A ND SALES HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE AND CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN PAID THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL S. THE I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 14 BROKER HAS CHARGED SECURITIES TRANSACTION TAX ON TH ESE TRANSACTIONS AND ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BEEN ABL E TO CONTROVERT ANY OF THESE EVIDENCES. THUS, ORDER OF L D. CIT(A) SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. 14. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS WE LL AS MATERIAL REFERRED TO BEFORE US. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE-FIRM IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN SHARES AND ALSO MADE INVESTMENT IN SHARES FROM WHERE ASSES SEE HAD SHOWN HUGE BUSINESS INCOME AND ALSO SHOWN CAPITAL G AIN. ONE OF THE FACTS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09 ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED PROFIT FROM TRADING IN SHA RES OF REI AGRO LTD. AND ALSO DURING THE YEAR ASSESSEE HAS TRA NSFERRED OPENING STOCK AND PURCHASED SHARES OF REI AGRO INDI A UNDER INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN SEPARA TE LEDGER ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF PURCHASES MADE UNDER INVESTME NT ACCOUNT OF RS.13,38,77,337/- AND HAD ALSO SHOWN PUR CHASES OF RS.27,84,14,870/- UNDER STOCK-IN-TRADE FOR TRADI NG PURPOSE FROM WHICH ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INCOME OF RS.16,66,59,460/- AND STOCK (INVESTMENT) HAS BEEN D ISCLOSED AT RS.13,38,77,338/-. NOW, IN SO FAR AS TRADING OF SHARES IS CONCERNED, NO ADVERSE INFERENCE HAS BEEN DRAWN BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. 15. THE ASSESSEES CASE HAS BEEN REOPENED U/S.14 7 ON THE BASIS OF SOME INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATI ON WING I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 15 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GENERATED SOME BOGUS LONG TER M CAPITAL GAIN IN COLLUSION WITH M/S. REI AGRO LTD. H OWEVER, NO SUCH EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECOR D NOR THERE IS ANY REPORT WITH REGARD TO NATURE OF COLLUS ION IMPLICATING THE ASSESSEE THAT IT WAS INVOLVED IN AN Y OF SUCH COLLUSION WITH M/S. REI AGRO LTD. FOR GENERATING BO GUS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. STRONG RELIANCE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH REGARD TO THE STATEMENT OF S HRI BRIJ MOHAN VYAS, AN EMPLOYEE OF REI AGRO GROUP DURING TH E SURVEY CARRIED OUT ON 07.08.2012 ON REI AGRO LTD. T HE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED ABOVE. FROM PLAIN READING OF THE STAEM ENT, NOWHERE IT IS BORNE OUT THAT WHETHER THE COMPANY WA S INTO MANIPULATING OF SHARE PRICES IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE. HE ONLY REFERS TO HOW ONE, SANDEEP KUMAR JHUNJUNWALA HAS ASK ED TO BUY THE SHARES OF M/S. REI AGRO AND WHAT IS THE RIG HT TIME TO BUY AND SELL THE SHARES OF SUCH COMPANY. ONE HIGHLI GHTED PORTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON WHICH ADVERSE I NFERENCE HAS BEEN DRAWN IS THAT THE COMPANIES HAVE ISSUED RI GHT ISSUES AT RS.19.50/- AND NOW THE RATE IS DOWN SO WE ARE INCREASING OUR STAKE AND WE ARE CONTROLLING AND DRI VING THE SHARES TO MAINTAIN THE RATES FOR THE INTEREST OF SH AREHOLDERS. THIS STATEMENT ONLY REFERS THAT THE COMPANY TRIES T O SEE THAT THE SHARE PRICE DOES NOT FALL IN THE INTEREST OF TH E SHAREHOLDERS, NOWHERE IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THE COM PANY WAS INVOLVED IN RIGGING THE PRICE IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE . ANOTHER FACT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOTED AND HAS DRAWN ADVERSE I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 16 INFERENCE IS THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE TRANSACTION OF SHARES OF SOME OF THE GUJARAT BASED COMPANIES, WHO IN THEIR B ALANCE SHEET HAVE SHOWN LOSSES ON ACCOUNT TRADING OF SHARE OF THIS COMPANY. HE IS TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE THAT HOW FUNDS WERE FLOWING FROM REI AGRO GROUP ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS TO VARIOUS 6 COMPANIES WHO HAVE PURCHASED SHARES FR OM THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER PURELY ON HYPOTHETICAL PRES UMPTION AND WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD, HE HAS ASSUMED THAT CASH MUST HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO REI GROUP AGRO. HOW TH E ENTIRE FUND FLOW CHART HAS BEEN LINKED WITH ASSESSEE TO AD VERSE INFERENCE IS NOT CLEAR. IF REI AGRO GROUP HAS FUNDE D CERTAIN COMPANIES THROUGH LOAN AND IF THESE SIX COMPANIES H AVE PURCHASED SHARES FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THEN HAVE SU FFERED LOSSES, THEN HOW IT CAN BE INFERRED THAT THERE WAS SOME KIND OF COLLUSION OF ASSESSEE. FIRST OF ALL, IT IS NOT C LEAR THAT THESE COMPANIES HAVE INCURRED LOSSES MERELY ON TRADING OF SHARES OF REI AGRO GROUP; AND SECONDLY, IF THE ENTIRE TRANSAC TION IS THROUGH NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE HAD TRADED ON QUOTE D MARKET PRICE, THEN HOW IT CAN BE INFERRED THAT THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ON ACCOUNT OF DUMPING OF LOSSES IN THE BOOKS OF SOME GUJARAT BASED COMPANIES. THERE HAS TO BE SOME MATERIAL OR INQUIRY WHEREIN ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE INVOLVED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY EITHER IN RIGGING OF PRICE OF REI AGRO GROUP OR WAS IN SOME KIND OF COLLUSION FOR SUCH ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. 16. ONE ANOTHER ANGLE WHICH CAN BE SEEN IS THAT, NOWHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATED THAT THE SHARES OF THE REI I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 17 AGRO GROUP HAVE JUMPED ASTRONOMICALLY WITHIN A SHOR T PERIOD; OR REI GROUP HAS BEEN BLACK LISTED EITHER B Y THE SEBI OR BY THE STOCK EXCHANGE FOR ANY KIND OF PRICE MANI PULATION OR ANY KIND OF ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EVEN BROUGHT ON RECORD THAT REI AGRO HAD NO SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL WORTH WHICH CAN JUSTIFY THE SH ARE PRICE. THE SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD. IS A FREELY TRADED SHAR E IN STOCK EXCHANGE WHERE THE MILLIONS ARE TRADING IN THESE SH ARES REGULARLY AS BROUGHT OUT BY THE LD. COUNSEL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. WHEN ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THESE SHARES F OR THE TRADING PURPOSE IN THE EARLIER YEARS, WHICH HAS BEE N ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT; AND IF PART OF THE SAME SCRIP HA S BEEN CONVERTED INTO INVESTMENT AND SOLD DURING THE YEAR, THEN CAN IT BE HELD THAT PART OF THE TRANSACTION IS A BOGUS TRANSACTION SO AS TO INVOKE DEEMING FICTION OF SECTION 68. THE PURCHASES OF SHARES HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER, AS HE HAS TAXED ONLY THE NET CAPITAL GAIN. IF THESE SH ARES WERE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE EARLIER YE ARS ACQUIRED AS STOCK-IN-TRADE, WHICH HAS BEEN SOLD THROUGH STOC K EXCHANGE AFTER PAYING STT AND THE MONEY HAS BEEN RE CEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS, THEN HOW IT CAN BE INFERR ED THAT SHARES WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD BY WAY OF SOME BOGUS ENTRY. IF THE CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND IN THE BOOKS ARE FROM SALE OF AN ASSET OR STOCK THEN SAME CANNOT BE ADDED U/S.68. THE ENTIRE PREMISE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BASE D ON SOME INVESTIGATION REPORT, WHEREIN THERE IS ONLY PRESUMP TION DRAWN THAT, SINCE SOME GUJARAT COMPANY HAVE PURCHASED THE I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 18 SHARES WHO HAVE INCURRED LOSSES AND WERE BEING FUND ED THROUGH VARIOUS ROUTES ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN , THEREFORE THERE MUST BE SOME COLLUSION. BUT SUCH A REPORT DOES NOT LEAD TO ANY KIND OF INFERENCE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INVOLVED IN EITHER OF THESE C HAINS OF COMPANIES TO ROUTE ANY UNACCOUNTED MONEY. IT IS NOT A CASE HERE WHERE THERE IS ONE INSTANCE OF SALE AND PURCHA SE OF PARTICULAR SHARE WHICH HAS BEEN SOLD DURING THE YEA R, BUT HERE IT IS A CASE WHERE ASSESSEE IS A TRADER IN SHA RES WHO HAS DEALT IN SEVERAL SCRIPS AND EVEN SHOWING BUSINESS I NCOME FROM SUCH TRADING OF SHARES AND ALSO DEALING IN INV ESTMENT OF SHARES. 17. IN ONE OF THE STATEMENT OF SHRI MANOJ SINGH JADOUN WHICH HAS BEEN RECORDED BY THE INVESTIGATION WING, AS INCORPORATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS SEEN TH AT A SPECIFIC QUESTION WAS ASKED VIDE QUESTION NO.20 AS TO WHY AN D WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR PURCHASE OF SHARE OF REI AGRO LT D. ON A VERY HIGHER PRICE AND SECONDLY ON SUFFERING OF LOSS ES BY A GROUP OF COMPANIES. THE SAID QUESTION AND REPLY REA DS AS UNDER: Q.20 WHAT WAS THE REASON OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD AT VERY HIGH PRICES AND CONSEQUENTLY SUFFERING LOSS ES BY YOUR GROUP COMPANIES? ANS. SIR, THESE COMPANIES HAVE MADE INVESTMENT IN T HE SHARES OF REI AGRO LTD WITH THE INTENTION TO EARN PROFIT AND THE SAME WAS PURELY A BUSINESS DECISION AND ON THE BASIS OF STUD Y OF THE SHARE MARKET. HOWEVER, SOMETIMES WE HAD TAKEN ADVICE FROM DIRECTOR OF M/S. TRIPTI MERCHANTS PVT. LTD REGARDING INVESTMENT TO BE MADE IN I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 19 SHARES. IN RETURNS, THEY ARE BEARING WITH US IN LOS SES MADE BY MY COMPANIES. Q. 22. THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN UNSECURED LOAN WITHOUT ANY INTEREST AND ALSO INCURRED HUGE LOSSES. DOES THIS S UGGEST THAT YOU ARE BUYING THESE SHARES AT THE INSTANCE OF PARTIES WHO ARE GIVING LOAN TO YOU. ANS. NO, SIR, THE WHOLE PURCHASES ARE PURELY BUSINE SS DECISION TO EARN THE PROFIT. HOWEVER, SOMETIMES WE HAD TAKEN TH E ADVICE OF FROM DIRECTOR OF M/S. TRIPTI MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. RE GARDING INVESTMENT TO BE MADE IN SHARES. HERE AGAIN, NO ADVERSE INFERENCE FROM SUCH A STATEM ENT CAN BE DRAWN, AS IT HAS BEEN CATEGORICALLY SAID THAT TH AES GUJARAT BASED COMPANIES HAVE MADE INVESTMENT IN REI GROUP W ITH AN INTENTION TO EARN PROFIT AND SAME WAS PURELY A BUSI NESS DECISION AND ON THE BASIS OF STUDY OF SHARE MARKET AND SOMETIME ADVICE IS TAKEN FROM DIRECTOR OF M/S. TRIP THI MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. REGARDING INVESTMENT TO BE MADE IN THE SHARES AND THESE COMPANIES HAVE ALSO DEALT AND MADE INVESTMENT IN SHARES PURELY OUT OF DECISION TO EARN PROFIT. NOW TO DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCE THAT THE DEALING IN S HARES WERE DUE TO SOME KIND OF COLLUSION FOR GENERATING LOSS I N THE BOOKS OF GUJARAT COMPANIES IS TOO FARFETCHED. WE ARE UNABL E TO APPRECIATE AS TO HOW THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS TRYIN G TO DRAW A POSSIBLE LINK OF ANY KIND OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF BOGUS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHAR ES OF REI AGRO LTD. AS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT (A) AND ALSO BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD IS THAT, ALL THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN THROUGH ACCREDITED BROKERAGE FIRM THROUG H I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 20 NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE AND ALL THE DETAILS OF CONT RACT NOTES, INVOICES, COPIES OF ACCOUNT OF BROKERAGE FIRM HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED; AND NONE OF THE PURCHASES HAVE BEEN DONE OFF-LINE AS ALL HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS AT A QUOTED PRICE ON THE DATE. T HUS, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER AND FINDING OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND SAME IS CONFIRMED AND ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER IS THUS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 18. SINCE SIMILAR ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE AND ON SA ME REASONING AND FACTS, THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ALLOWED TH E ASSESSEES APPEAL FOLLOWING HIS OWN ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008- 09, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF OUR AFORESAID REASONING A ND FINDING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-11 IS CONFIRMED AND THE ADDI TION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DELETED. 19. SINCE, WE HAVE ALREADY DELETED THE ADDITION O N MERITS, THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT GOING INTO THE VALIDITY OF RE OPENING U/S.147, AS IT HAS BECOME PURELY ACADEMIC AND IS KE PT OPEN. ACCORDINGLY, CROSS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 20. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENU E IS DISMISSED AND CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019. I.T.AS. NO.4731, 4732, 4733/DEL/16 & CO NO314, 315 & 316/DEL/2016 21 SD/- SD/- [PRASHANT MAHARISHI] [AMIT SHUKLA] [ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 PKK: