INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MEHSANA, MEHSANA V. LEGAL HEIR OF ARVINDKUMAR SEVANTILAL SHAH, MEHSANA

ITA 1264/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana against the legal heir of Arvindkumar Sevantilal Shah concerning the Assessment Year 2012-13. The core issue was the deletion of an addition of Rs.1,42,200 by the CIT(A), which was initially added by the Revenue as profit from penny stocks. The Revenue contended that the assessee had made profits from trading in penny stocks, specifically M/s.VMS Industries Limited. However, the CIT(A) found no evidence to support this claim and deleted the addition. The Revenue's appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal argued that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by deleting this addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780145 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TEJ SHAH
• Assessee Lawyers: SUDHAKAR VERMA

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1264/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana. Vs. Legal Heir of Arvindkumar Sevantilal Shah, B 10, Nivid Appartment, Jethabhai Park, Paldi, Ahmedabad-380007. [PAN :AEOPS0452 G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR Respondent by: Shri Tej Shah, AR Date of Hearing 06.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 07.10.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai, vide order dated 07.03.2025 relevant to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: (1) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,42,200/- considering the investment in Penny Stock namely M/s.VMS Industries Limited. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1264/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2– (2) The Appellant craves leave to add, later and/or to amend all any the ground before the final hearing of the appeal. 3. The Revenue made an addition of Rs.1,42,200/- on account of the profit and out of Penny Stock. However, the Revenue absolutely failed to bring on record any iota of evidence that the assessee has indeed purchased and sold stock and received monies in his account. In the absence of any cogent evidence to prove that the assessee has received monies or engaged in the sale of stock, no addition can be made in this case. 4. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 07.10.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 07.10.2025 MV आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "