Sandeep Saraf, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-43(6), Kolkata

ITA 157/KOL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9544 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order; Set aside; Bogus
• Section: 68; 263

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी संजय शमा[ ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी ͬगरȣश अĒवाल ,लेखा सदèय के सम¢ [Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member & Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No.157/Kol/2021 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sandeep Saraf (PAN: ALMPS 4599 M) Vs. ITO, Ward-43(6), Kolkata Appellant / )अपीलाथȸ( Respondent / )Ĥ×य थȸ( Date of Hearing / स ु नवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 29.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 30.09.2022 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT ORDER / आदेश Per Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-15, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. PCIT(A)”] dated 22.06.2020 for the AY 2015-16. 2. Though the Registry has pointed out that the appeal is time barred, however, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020, the period of filing appeal during the COVID-19 pandemic is to be excluded for the purpose of counting the limitation period. In view of this, the appeal is treated as filed within the limitation period. 2 I.T.A. No.157/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sandeep Saraf 2. The sole issue raised in grounds of appeal is relating to the order passed by the ld. PCIT u/s 263 by which ld. PCIT treating the LTCG of Rs. 62,21,909/- claimed on the sale of shares of CCL International Ltd. claimed to be bogus and setting aside the order dated 25.05.2017 passed by the ld. AO. 3. At the outset, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted before us stating that since the instant order passed by the ld. PCIT u/s 263 by which he setting aside the order dated 25.05.2017 is relating to issue of penny stock and same is squarely covered against the assessee by the recent decision of the Calcutta High Court vide common order dated 14.06.2022 in a batch of 90 appeals with a lead case titled as PCIT vs Swati Bajaj in IT No. GA/2/2022 & others. We also note that the facts and issue involved in the above appeal of the assessee by which, ld. PCIT set aside the order of the AO is similar to that as was before the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court vide its decision dated 14.06.2022 (supra) has affirmed the such addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the I.T. Act in respect of bogus long term capital gain. In view of this, we affirmed the order dated 22.06.2018 passed by the ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by which ld. PCIT set aside the assessment order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the ld. AO. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stands dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 30 th September, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Girish Agrawal / ͬगरȣश अĒवाल) (Sonjoy Sarma /संजय शमा[) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 30 th September, 2022 Biswajit, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. No.157/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sandeep Saraf Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Sandeep Saraf, Satyanarayan Park, A.C. Market, Upper Basement, D-120/143, 141, Cotton Street, Kolkata-700007. 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-43(6), Kolkata. 3. Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata 4. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata