Neelam Dugar , Hooghly V. ITO, Ward - 35(2), Kolkata , Kolkata

ITA 1530/KOL/2018

AI Insights

Neelam Dugar appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding her income tax return for the assessment year 2014-2015. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 69,57,000, representing long-term capital gains from the sale of shares of M/s. Unno Industries Limited, which the Assessing Officer classified as bogus penny stocks. The Tribunal, referencing a decision by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Swati Bajaj & Others, upheld the lower authorities' findings, dismissing the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129026 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Swati Bajaj & Others (2022) 139 taxmann.com 352(Cal.)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 234B; 143(2)

Judgement Text

ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar,......................................Appellant 75, BBD Road, Eliza 3, 4 th Floor, HindMotor, Hooghly-712233 [PAN: AHHPD6956A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,...............................Respondent Ward-35(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7 th Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances by: Shri A.N. Keshri, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee N o n e, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : January 09, 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : January 19, 2023 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata dated 18.04.2018 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal. In Ground No. 1, she has submitted that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.69,57,000/-, which was added by the ld. Assessing Officer under section ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 2 68 of the Income Tax Act. In Ground No. 2, she has pleaded that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,66,794/- and in Ground No. 3, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under section 234A & 234B of the Income Tax Act. In Grounds No. 4 & 5, the assessee has raised supporting argument qua earlier three grounds of appeal. 3. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the assessment record would reveal that assesese has filed her original return of income on 19.03.2015 declaring total income of Rs.3,09,070/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed to the ld. Assessing Officer that assessee has earned capital gain from sale of shares of M/s. Unno Industries Limited to the tune of Rs.66,71,743/-. She has purchased these shares for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and sold them for a consideration of Rs.69,57,000/-. Thus she claimed exempt income under section 10(38) of Rs.66,71,743/-. Apart from these, there were certain other small activities. The ld. Assessing Officer has noticed that there is a jump of almost 2669 percent in a span of 29 months in the value of such shares. Hence, he made a detailed analysis and held that it is a bogus penny stock held by the assessee and the game is stage managed. The ld. Assessing Officer has recorded a detailed finding and made the addition of Rs.69,57,000/-. 4. On appeal, the ld. 1 st Appellate Authority has reproduced the assessment order and thereafter recorded the following finding:- ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 3 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 4 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 5 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 6 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 7 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 8 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 9 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 10 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 11 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 12 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 13 ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 14 5. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that both the authorities have recorded exhaustive finding of fact narrating the circumstances as to how investment made by the assessee in the shares of M/s. Unno Industries Limited was a bogus penny stock company, which has artificially enhanced the value of shares in a short span of time. This aspect is fully covered by the latest decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of Swati Bajaj & Others (2022) 139 taxmann.com 352(Cal.) pronounced on 14.06.2022. We respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal, hence, it is rejected. 6. As far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, the ld. Assessing Officer has estimated payment of commission for getting bogus long-term capital gain @ 2.5% and he worked out such commission at Rs.1,66,794/-. Since we have confirmed the conclusions of the revenue authorities that the total claim of long-term capital gain was a bogus one, therefore, this commission payment is also to be disallowed and required to be added back. The ld. Assessing Officer has rightly made the addition, which has been confirmed by the ld. ITA No. 1530/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Neelam Dugar 15 1 st Appellate Authority. We do not find any merit in this ground of appeal also. It is rejected. 7. As far as Ground No. 3 is concerned, charging of interest under section 234A and 234B is consequential in nature to the first ground of appeal, which we have already decided. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar) (Rajpal Yadav) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 19 th day of January, 2023 Copies to :(1) Neelam Dugar, 75, BBD Road, Eliza 3, 4 th Floor, HindMotor, Hooghly-712233 (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-35(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7 th Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata; 4) Commissioner of Income Tax- ; (5) The Departmental Representative (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S.