ADDL CIT 13(3), MUMBAI V. LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H DADIA (THROUGH L/J SJRO JITEN DAIDA), MUMBAI

ITA 1148/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2987 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K MOHANDA S
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence
• Section: 133(6); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR , AM ./ ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06 ) A C I T - 13(3) / VS. LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA ROOM NO. 427, AYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400020 (THROUGH L/H SHRI JITEN DADIA) 304, SUJATA CHAMBERS 1/3 ABHECHAND GANDHI MARG OFF, NARSI NATHA STREET MASJID, MUMBAI 400009 ./ PAN - AACPD 1484B /APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY: SHRI K. MOHANDAS / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MADHUR AGRAWAL / DATE OF HEARING : 15.10. 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 .10.2015 / O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2012 PASSED BY CIT(A) - 24, MUMBAI AND IT PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2005 - 06. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS WERE URGED BY THE REVENUE: - 1. (I) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.16,15,188/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT. (II) WHILE DOING SO, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THA T THE TRANSACTIONS UNDERTAKEN BY THE 2 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES BUT THE BOOK ENTRIES TAKEN FOR LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS. 2. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUND(S) BE SET ASIDE AND TH AT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DYES AND CHEMICALS. THE ONLY ISSUE BEFORE US IS THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF MAKING ADDITION OF ` 16,15,188/ - INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN PAGES 2 TO 5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE FACTS LEADING TO THIS ADDITION WERE THAT THE TOTAL LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN INCLUDED AN AMOUNT OF ` 15,49,226/ - EARNED ON SALE OF SHARES OF M/S. SHUTI CONSTRUCTION. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER FOUND THAT 150000 SHARES WERE PURCHASED ON 31.07.2003 FOR AN AMOUNT OF ` 65,961/ - . THESE SHARES WERE SOLD ON 15.12.2004 FOR A TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF ` 16,15,188/ - . DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE A.O ASKED APPELLANT TO FURNISH FOLLOWING DETAILS: - I T IS SEEN FROM THE AUDIT REPORT AND THE ANNEXURES FLIED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME WITH REGARD TO LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS: A) IT IS SEEN THAT YOU HAVE PURCHASED 150000 SHARES OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION. THE TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE CLAIMED TO BE PAID WAS RS . 65,961.33/ - . IT IS THEREFORE ASCERTAIN THAT ALL SUCH SHARES WERE ALLEGEDLY SOLD ON 15.12.2004 [DATE OF PURCHASE : 31.07.2003] FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS. 16,15,188.30 RESULTED INTO LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS. YOU HAVE CLAIMED THE NET SALES CONSIDERATION AS LONG - TE RM CAPITAL GAINS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS OF RS.18,36,948.01. THE SAME AMOUNT HAS BEEN CLAIMED AS EXEMPT U/S. 10(38) OF THE ACT. 3 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA B) IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO FURNISH WHETHER THE PURCHASES OF SHARES WERE MADE BY CASH OR BY CHEQUE. PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF THE SAME IF PAYMENTS WERE PAYMENT MADE IN CHEQUES. C) CONTRACT NOTES ISSUED BY PROGRESS ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE AND IS SEEN THAT THE PURCHASE PRICE PER SHARE IS RS. 0.43/ - AND THE 'E PRICE PER SHARE COMES TO RS. 10.76/ - RESULTING IN SUCH HUGE APPRECIATION IN VALUE OF SHARES IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD. PLEASE SUBMIT FURTHER - I) WHETHER SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION IS A LISTED COMPANY OF THE STOCK EXCHANGES. II) WHEN DID SUCH SHARES CREDITED IN YOUR DE - MAT ACCOUNT. III) DEMAT STATEMENT FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD WHEN SUCH SHARES WERE CREDITED IN YOU ACCOUNT AND DEBITED FROM YOUR ACCOUNT AT THE TIME OF SALE. IV) WHETHER YOU HAVE RECEIVED ANY DIVIDED FROM THE COMPANY DURING THE HOLDING PERIOD. V) BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE COMPANY AS ON 31.03.2003, 31.03.2004 AND 31.03.2005, IF THE SAME WAS SENT TO YOU BY THE COMPANY.' 4. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 133(6) TO M/S. VAKIL SHARES AND SECURITIES P. LTD., FROM W HOM THE SHARES WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED. THE NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BACK UNSERVED WITH REMARKS 'LEFT'. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO ISSUED NOTICE TO M/S. SUSHIL FINANCE CONSULTANTS LTD, THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTION ED THAT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM M/S. SUSHIL FINANCE CONSULTANTS LTD. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 05.12.2007 EXPLAINED AS UNDER: - 4 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA 'REGARDING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION. A) WE HAVE PURCHASES 15000 SHARES FACE VALUE OF RS. 10/ - AND WHICH IS SPILLED IN RE. 1/ - PER SHARE AND HENCE TOTAL SHARES BECOME 1,50,000/ - . B) PURCHASES OF SHARES WERE MADE BY CASH, COPY OF BILL AND CONTRACT ALONG WITH PAYMENT VOUCHERS IS ENCLOSED. C) CONTRACT NOTE AND BILL OF PURCHASE AND SALE IS ENCLOSED. D) M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION IS LISTED WITH BOMBAY STOCK EXCHANGE AND SHARES ARE CREDITED IN BROKER ACCOUNT ON JULY, 2003 AND AFTER SPLITED IN OCTOBER, 2004 AND IT IS CREDITED IN OUR CLIENT DEMAT ACCO UNT IN NOVEMBER, 2004. E) COPY OF DEMAT ACCOUNT IS ALREADY SUBMITTED AND WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY DIVIDEND OR BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE COMPANY.' 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE SHARES WERE KEPT WITH THE BROKER BEFORE ITS SPL ITTING INTO 150000 SHARES OF VALUE OF ` 1/ - PER SHARE. PURCHASES WERE MADE IN CASH IN SUPPORT OF WHICH ONLY CASH VOUCHERS AND JOURNAL ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF ASSESSEE AND BROKER S NOTE WERE SUBMITTED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE SHARES WE RE DEMATERIALIZED AND CREDITED IN DEMAT ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE ONLY IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2004, JUST ONE MONTH BEFORE THE SALE OF SUCH SHARES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN HOW THE PURCHASE PRICE PER SHARE OF ` 0.13 ESCALATED UPTO ` 10.76 PER SHARE IN A SHORT PERIOD OF 17 MONTHS. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION, SHARES OF WHICH WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE. THE 5 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA ASSESSING O FFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FACT THAT SH ARE S WERE ACTUALLY PURCHASED IN JULY, 2003. ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO ASKED ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT PROOF OF PHYSICAL SHARES ALLOTTED TO HIM AND TO FURNISH THE EVIDENCE THAT THESE SHARES WERE ACTUALLY TRANS FERRED IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE FROM THE PREVIOUS SHARE HOLDER. ASSESSING OFFICER MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE EXPLANATION/ EVIDENCE. ASSESSING OFFICER DOUBTED AS TO WHETHER THESE SHARES WERE BONAFIDELY PURCHASED THR OUGH SAID BROKER IN THE MONTH OF JULY, 2003. ASSESSING OFFICER CONDUCTED VARIOUS ENQUIRIES IN THIS REGARD AND HAVING CONSIDERING THE SAME HE ADDED ` 16,15,188/ - UNDER SECTION 68 BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: - IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS HELD THAT THE ALLEGED PUR CHASE AND SALE OF SHARES OF M/S. SHUKUM CONSTRUCTION WERE TRANSACTED ON TO BOOK BOGUS CAPITAL GAIN IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE AMOUNT OF RS.16,15,188/ - IS TREATED AS NOT EXPLAINED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE SUM SO CREDITED IS CONSIDERED AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ARE INITIATED SEPARATELY FOR CONCEALING THE TRUE AND CORRECT PARTICULARS OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BE FORE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHEREIN VARIOUS CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SAME CIT(A) GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME HAS BEEN OPPOSED BY THE REVENUE BY, INTER ALIA, SUBMITTING THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION OF ` 16,15,188/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT 6 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA ACCEPTING THE TRANSACTION UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NO GENUINE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASES AND SALES OF SHARES BUT THE BOOK ENTRIES TAKEN FOR LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS. ACCORDINGLY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF ` 16,15,188/ - REPRESENT SALE PROCEEDS OF 150000 SHARES OF M/S. SHAKUN CONSTRUCTION. THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS EARNED OUT OF SALE OF SHARES WERE PROPERLY REFLECTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAID AMOUNT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICERS OBSERVATION REGARDING PURCHASE OF I MPUGNED SHARES AS A BOGUS PURCHA SE WAS PURELY BASED ON MERE CONJECTURES, SURMISES AND SUSPICION. ASSESSEE ALSO FILED DOCUMENTS SUCH AS BROKERS NOTE FOR PURCHASE AND ALSO SALE OF SHARES, RECEIPT OF CASH PAID TO BROKER, DEMAT STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE ETC. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED IN DETAIL FROM PURCHASE OF SHARES TILL SALE OF SHARES. ASSESSEE FILED CONTRACT NOTES ISSUED BY BROKER FROM WHOM SHARES WERE PURCHASED, LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF SHARE BROKER FOR THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR , COP IES OF RECEIPT ISS UED BY BROKER, COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF M/ S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION, AND BROKER IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE , COPIES OF COMPUTATION AND BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2004 - 05 REFLECTING THE SHARES AND VARIOUS OTHER 7 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA DETAILS. ON THE BASIS OF DE TAILS/EVIDENCES FILED, THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIG HTLY BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A), SAME SHOULD BE UPHELD. 7. WE FIND THAT FACTS OF THE CASE AS UNDER: - 15000 SHARES PURCHASED OF M/S. SHUKUM CONSTRUCTION - SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION : LISTED IN B.S.E - DATE OF PURCHASE : 31 - 7 - 2003 - COST OF PURCHASE : ` 65,916/ - - MODE OF PAYMENT : CASH - PURCHASED THROUGH : M/S. T.H. VAKIL SHARES A ND SECURITIES P. LTD. - COPIES OF BILLS/CONTRACT NOTE : FILED WITH A.O. - PAYMENT VOUCHERS - SPLIT OF SHARES (1X10) : 1,50,000 - OCTOBER 2004 - SHARES HELD BY BROKER : FROM JULY, 2003 TO NOVEMBER, APPLANTS DE - MAT A/C 2004 - SALE OF SHARES : 15.12.2004 - SALE CONSIDERATION : RS.16,15 ,188 - MODE OF PAYMENT RECEIVED : CHEQUE - SOLD THROUGH : M/S. SUSHIL FINANCE CONSULTANTS LTD. 8. THE DETAILS IN THE FORM OF VOUCHERS, COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTE, LEDGER ACCOUNT ETC. WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CONCERNED ASSESSING OFFICER. D URING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, FEW ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE ALSO FILED I.E. (I) COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION, AND BROKER IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE, (II) COPY OF LETTER DATED 2 ND AUGUST, 2003 WRITTEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE B ROKER FOR KEEPING THE SHARES IN BROKER'S DEMAT ACCOUNT, (III) COPY OF LETTER DATED 16 TH MAY, 2008 GIVEN BY BROKER CONFIRMING 8 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA THE TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE OF SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE, PRINT - OUT OF WEBSITE SHOWING STOCK SUPPLIED OF SHARES, (IV) COPY OF ASSESSEE'S LETTER TO THE BROKER REQUESTING FOR TRANSFERRING 150000 SHARES (AFTER SPLITTING UP INTO ASSESSEE'S DEMAT ACCOUNT). ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR ADMISSION OF THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SAME CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT FIRSTLY, THE ISSUE OF PURCHASES, NON SERVICE OF NOTICE ON BROKER FROM WHOM SHARES WERE PURCHASED, PURCHASE OF SHARES IN CASH, HOLDING OF ASSESSEE'S SHARE BY THE BROKER FROM WHOM THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED, THEREAFTER TRANSFER OF THESE SHARES AFTER SPLITTING UP INTO THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, SALE OF SHARES BY ASSESSEE THROUGH ANOTHER BROKER AND FINALLY THE RECEIPT OF SALE CONSIDERATION BY CHEQUE BY THE ASSESSEE. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE FILED VARIOUS DETAILS AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM OF P URCHASE OF ABOVE SHARES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF PURCHASE OF SHARES BUT ULTIMATELY HE MADE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF ` 16,15,188/ - RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH CHEQUE FROM THE SHARE BROKER THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FILED COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES, COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF SHARE BROKER FROM WHOM SHARES WERE PURCHASED, .COPIES OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY BROKER TO ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES, COMPUTATION OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2004 AND OTHER ANNEXURE FILED WITH RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2004 - 05, IN WHICH SHARES OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION, WERE SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD 'INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND DEBENTURES'. 9. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THESE DOCUMENTS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE OF SHARES. DURING 9 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE ALS O FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE RELATING TO THE PURCHASE PART OF THE TRANSACTION. SINCE, ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASES I.E. INVESTMENT MADE IN PURCHASE OF SHARE, THEREFORE, THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE NOT FORWARDED TO ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. ASSESSEE ALSO FILED BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER , AT RELEVANT POINT OF TIME, COPY OF D EMAT STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH 150000 SHARES WERE CREDITED TO ASSESSEE'S D EMAT ACCOUNT ON 22 ND NOVEMBER, 2004. THIS D EMAT ACCOUNT ESTABLISHES THE FACT OF OWNERSHIP OF THE ASSESSEE OF 150000 SHARES OF M/S. SHUKUN CONSTRUCTION, AS ON 22 ND NOVEMBER, 2004. NO ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE CONSIDERATION. THE ONLY ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER WAS IN RESPECT OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF ` 16,15,188/ - UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ASSESSEE ALSO FILED COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTE FOR SALE OF 150000 SHARES SOLD THROU GH THE BROKER AND COPIES OF BANK STATEMENT SHOWING THE RECEIPT OF AMOUNT OF ` 16,15,188/ - FROM THE BROKER THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT ASSESSEE HAS TO PROVE THE NATURE OF CREDIT APPEARING IN THE BOOKS AND ALSO IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE CREDITS APPEARING IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE, THE CREDIT OF ` 16,15,188/ - WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD. THEREFORE, THE NATURE OF CREDIT IN THE BOOKS WAS EXPLAINED. THE IDENTITY OF THE SHARE BROKER WAS A LSO ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING THE CONTRACT NOTE AND OTHER DETAILS OF M/S. SUSHIL FINANCE CONSULTANTS LTD., THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD. THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SHARE BROKER WAS NOT DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . FURTHER, THE GENUIN ENESS OF THE 10 ITA NO. 1148/MUM/2013 LATE SHRI HIMATLAL H. DADIA TRANSACTIONS I.E. THE CREDITS IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE WAS ALSO EXPLAINED AS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE. THE EXISTENCE OF SHARES OF 150000 IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE WAS ALSO E STABLISHED BY FILING CONCERNED DE MAT ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE CONDITIONS FOR MAKING ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 WERE MISSING IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN OBSERVING THAT THE ADDITION MADE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT ARE NOT JUSTIFIED AND THE SAME WERE RIGHTLY DELETED BY HIM . THIS REASONED FINDING OF THE CIT(A) NEED NO INTERFERENCE FROM OUR SIDE. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH OCTO BER, 2015. 28.10.2015 SD/ - SD/ - (RAMIT KOCHAR) ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI , DATED 28 TH OCTOBER, 2015 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 24 , MUMBAI 4. / THE CIT - 13 , MUMBAI 5. , , / DR, H BENCH ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// /ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI