Davinder Sahni HUF, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 158/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9999 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTALDR
• Assessee Lawyers: AMANDEEP VATS
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Corroborative evidences; Onus to prove
• Section: 45(5); 133(6); 43(5); 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 158/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 M/S DAVINDER SAHNI, HUF, VS THE ACIT, 237, MODEL TOWN, CIRCLE VI, LUDHIANA LUDHIANA. PAN: AABHD4344K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AMANDEEP VATS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL,DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.05.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-3, LUDHIANA DATED 28.01.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01, CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN HOLDING THE SALE OF SH ARES AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,46,345/- AS SPECULATIVE INCOME A S PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. THE ISSUE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 7,15,220/- AS 'INCOME FROM OTHER SO URCES' INSTEAD OF INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS SH OWN BY THE ASSESSEE. 2 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2000-01 WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 30.10.2000 WHERE IN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES AMOUNTING TO RS.6,56,060/- WAS DECLARED. SIN CE, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS, THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF RS.7,15,220/- WAS TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER THE LD. CIT (A) DIRECTED THAT INCOME OF RS.6,56,060/- WAS TO BE ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. ON FURTHER APPEAL BY THE REVENUE, THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS DIRECTED AS UNDER : ' ADMITTEDLY, THE SHARES OF DIFFERENT COMPANIES IN QUE STION ARE NOT REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE US BUT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SHARES HAVE BE EN PHYSICALLY DELIVERED TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PROFITS EARNED ON THE TRANSFER OF SUCH SHA RES IS ASSESSABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE HAS TO ESTABLISH THAT IT IS OUTSIDE THE AMB IT OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43(5) OF THE ACT. IN THE CASE OF DELIVERY BASED TRANSACTIONS, THE ASSESSEE IS TO ESTA BLISH THE EXISTENCE OF ASSET AND ITS TRANSFER AND IN THE A BSENCE OF SUCH EVIDENCE , THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 45(5) ARE ATTRACTED. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REM IT THIS ISSUE BACK TO BE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOS E OF VERIFYING THE DELIVERY OF SHARES IN ORDER, TO ESTABLIS H WHETHER THE TRANSACTION OF TRANSFER OF SHARES IS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS OR INCOME FROM SPECULATION U/S 43(5) OF THE ACT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THU S THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE '. 3 3(I) IN PURSUANCE OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE IT A T, ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED FOR INFORMATION U/S 133(6) OF THE I.T ACT 1961 FROM M/S BLUE CHIP INVESTMENT, NEW DELHI VIDE LETTER DATED 08.12.2010 AND 20.12.2010, HOWEVER NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT BRING ANY OTHER EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING O FFICER TO ESTABLISH THE DELIVERY OF TRANSACTIONS. THEREFOR E, ENTIRE AMOUNT OF SALE OF SHARES AMOUNTING TO RS.7,15,220/- WAS TREATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILLED W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 27.01.2014 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.791948/- ON 30.10.2000 INCLUDING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.656060/- THAT THE RETURN WAS SCRUTINIZED U/S 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 REJECTING THE CAPITAL G AINS OF RS.656060/- AND MAKING ADDITION OF RS.715220/- O N ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES WHICH WA S ACTUALLY SALE PROCEEDS OF SHARES SHOWN IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THUS THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED VIDE ORDER DATED 13.03.2003 AT TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME OF R S. 851333/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II LUDHIANA WH O DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASSESS THE INCOME RS.656060/-(DIFFERENCE OF PURCHASE VALUE AND SALE V ALUE OF SHARES) UNDER THE HEAD LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN IN STEAD 4 OF ASSESSING THE ENTIRE SALE PROCEEDS OF RS.715220/ - UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 30.01.2004.FURTHER THE REVENUE PREFERRE D APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELL ATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH. THE LEARNED BENCH OF TRIBUNAL REMITTED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WI TH DIRECTIONS TO INCLUDE THE INCOME IN THE HEADS OF ASSESSEE EITHER AS INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GA INS OR INCOME FROM SPECULATION U/S 43(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT VIDES ORDER DATED 29.01.2010. THE LEARNED ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, LUDHIANA, TO WHOM THE FILE WAS REMITTED BACK, RE- INITIATED THE PROCEEDINGS TO VERIFY THE DELIVERY OF THE SHARES. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED ASSESSING AUTHORITY HA S AGAIN ERRED IN PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER TREATIN G THE SALE PROCEEDS AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES U/ S 68 OF THE ACT, WHICH IS AGAINST THE DIRECTIONS OF T HE LEARNED BENCH OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH. THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE LEARNED BEN CH OF INCOME TAX ACT TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THE LEARNED ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, LUDHIANA. THE LEARNED ASSESS ING AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE DIRECTIO NS OF THE IT AT TO INCLUDE THE INCOME IN THE HEADS OF ASS ESSEE EITHER AS INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS OR IN COME FROM SPECULATION U/S 43(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. T HUS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY RECOURSE TO ALTERNAT IVE 5 BEYOND THE DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT IS ILLEGAL AND BA D IN LAW. THEREFORE, IT IS REQUESTED BEFORE YOUR HONOUR TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.715220/- MADE U/S 68 AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES INSTEAD OF INCOME F ROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 45 (5) OR SPECULATION INCOME U/S 43(5). 4(I) FURTHER, IN CONTINUATION TO OUR PREVIOUS REPL Y DATED 27-01-2014, WE FURTHER WISH TO SUBMIT THAT IN THE PROCEEDINGS ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E A.Y 1999-2000, THER E WERE SIMILAR SHARE TRANSACTION WITH M/S SUMA FINANC E & INVESTMENTS LTD. AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS OF RS.106650/- WERE DECLARED THAT RETURN OF INCOME. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSEE'S 'DECLARATION OF INCOME UNDER HEAD LONG T ERM CAPITAL GAINS WAS REJECTED AND THE ENTIRE SHARE SAL E PROCEEDS OF RS.115115/- WERE TREATED AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND WAS ASSESSED ACCORDINGLY U/ S 68 OF THE I.T ACT, 1961. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE WE NT INTO APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX, (APPEAL)-II LUDHIANA. THE ID. APPELLANT AUTHORITY V IDE ORDER DATED 19-07-2005 ACCEPTED THE GROUNDS OF APPE AL AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASSESS ACCORD INGLY UNDER HEAD LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS. THE APPEAL WAS THEREFORE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO ACCEPTED THE VERSION AND NO FUR THER APPEAL WAS FILED. 6 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE HER REPORT DATED 24.10.2014 HAS STATED THAT THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE C ASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE PRETENDED TO ENTER INTO A SHA RE TRANSACTION OF 1300 SHARES, ALLEGEDLY HELD THEM FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR ON WHICH HE LATER EARNED PROFIT AMOUNTING RS.6,56,060/-. ON THIS ASSESSEE TOOK THE BENEFIT OF INDEXING BY CALCULATING LONG TERM CAPITA L GAIN OF RS. 1,15,115/-. 5(I) IN THIS CASE, ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED TWO TIMES ONCE U/S 148 AND SECOND U/S 143 (3) R.W.S 254 OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS RE VEALS THAT BOTH TIMES ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BUT ALL THE TIMES HE MISERABLY FAILED TO DISCHARGE HIS ONUS TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF COMPANIES HOLDING SHARES A S WELL AS EXECUTION OF TRANSACTIONS. 5(II) FURTHER MORE, THE INFORMATION CALLED FOR U/S 133(6) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TWICE ON 08.12.2010 AND 20.12.2010 FROM BLUE CHIP INVESTMENT, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI BY WHOM THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAD PURCHASED, THE ALLEGED SHARES DID NOT YIELD ANY RES ULT. THE SAID FIRM HAD NOT RESPONDED. IT FURTHER RAISES A DOUBT ON GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS. BESIDES THE HON'BLE ITAT WHICH HAS BEEN CONSIDERED THE FINAL FA CT FINDING AUTHORITY HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN PARA 9 O F ITS ORDER DATED 29.01.2010 THAT COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED FROM RESPECTING COMPANIES SHOWS THAT THE ALLEGED 7 SHARES WERE NEVER TRANSFERRED/REGISTERED IN THE NAM E OF THE ASSESSEE. 5(III) BESIDES, THE IN-GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS ALSO PROVED FROM THE ORDER OF A.O DATED 28.12.2010 IN WHICH IT WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN DETAILS, THE CONTENTS OF THE SAID PARAS ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: - DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NO NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO RECORDS BY THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE RATHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 29.11.2010 WERE ALMOST SAME DOCUMENTS WHICH HAD ALREADY BEEN DELIBERATED UPON.' 5(IV) SO THUS IT IS AMPLY CLEAR AND PROVED BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE ALLEGED TRANSACTION WAS COMPLETELY FICTITI OUS. IN OTHER WORDS THE ENTIRE SALE AND PURCHASE WAS AN ARRANGED AFFAIR WITH THE BROKER JUST TO INTRODUCE ASSESSEE'S OWN INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES TO ESCAPE FROM TAX LIABILITY. 6. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), CONSIDERING SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ALLOWED PART RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE APPELLATE ORDER HELD THAT, HOWEVER, WHERE THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE EVEN THE DISTINCTIVE NUMBER O F SHARES SOLD BY HIM THOUGH THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY CHEQUE, SALE OF SUCH SHARES SHOULD BE TREATED AS SPECULATIVE INCOME AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43( 5) OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN PARA 8 4.1 AND 4.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 4.1 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE ON RECORD. THE HON'BLE ITAT IN ITS ORDER HAS OBSERVED THAT FROM THE PERUSAL OF R ECORDS, WE FIND THAT ALL THE SHARES, WHICH WERE TRANSFERRED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WERE PURCHASED DURING THE PRECEDING YEAR. THE PURCHASE OF THE AFORESAID S HARES HAS BEEN ACCEPTED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO ADVERSE INFERENCE HAS BEEN DRAWN IN RESPECT OF THE SAID PURCHASE OF SHARES. THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS ALSO NOTED THAT THE SHARES OF D IFFERENT COMPANIES IN QUESTION ARE NOT REGISTERED IN THE NAM E OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SHAR ES HAS BEEN PHYSICALLY DELIVERED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF DELIVERY BASED TRANSACTION, THE ASSESSEE IS TO ESTAB LISH THE EXISTENCE OF ASSET AND ITS TRANSFER AND IN THE ABSEN CE OF SUCH EVIDENCE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 45 (5) ARE ATTRACTED. FURTHER, PARA 8 OF THE ORDER, HON'BLE ITAT HAS MADE FO LLOWING OBSERVATIONS : 'THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES, WHICH IS FILED ON RECORD. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE EVIDENCE FURNISHED, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED AND SOLD 200 SHARES OF ARCHIES GREETING AND GIFTS LTD AND THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BY WAY OF BROKER NOTES IS ENCLOSED AT PAGES 22 TO 25 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE PURCHASES PRICE AND SALE CONSIDERATION WAS PAID BY CHEQUE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE PERUSAL OF THE PURCHASE BILLS REFLECTS THE DISTINCTIVE NUMBER IN RESPECT OF T HE 200 SHARES OF ARCHIES GREETINGS & GIFTS LTD PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SECOND TRANSACTION IS IN RESPECT OF 6500 SHARES OF GENSIS FINANCE CO LTD AND THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO FURNISHED ON RECORD THE DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF 6500 SHARES. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURTHER PURCHASED 3500 SHARES OF GENSIS FINANCE CO. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED THE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF ITS PURCHASE AND SALES BY WAY OF BROKERS NOTES, WHICH TALKS OF DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS AS PER LIST, BUT NO SUCH LIST OR DETAILS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BEFORE US IN RESPECT OF THIS TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE/ SALE OF 3500 SHARES. SIMILARLY, IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF 2800 SHARES OF SUMA FINANCE & INVESTMENTS NO 9 DISTINCTIVE NUMBER OF THE SHARES PURCHASED HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE'. 4.2 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 29.12.2010 WHEREIN DETAILS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES WERE GIVEN. T HE BROKERS NOTE OF M/S BLUE CHIP INVESTMENTS, SHOWS, DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS OF SALE OF SHARES IN THE CASE O F M/S ARCHIES GREETINGS, 200 SHARES DISTINCTIVE NO'S:- 30 90501- 3099600 AND 3126301-3126400 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S GENESIS FINANCE CO LTD. 6500 SHARES DISTINCTIVE NO' S 262121-268620. HOWEVER IN THE CASE OF SALE OF SHARE S M/S SUMA FINANCE CO LTD. 2800 SHARES AND M/S GENESIS FINANCE CO LTD. 3500 SHARES, NO DISTINCTIVE NO OF SHA RES APPEAR ON THE SALE BILLS. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED LETTER U/S 133(6) OF THE I .T.ACT, 1961 TO M/S BLUE CHIP INVESTMENTS BUT COULD NOT GET ANY INFORMATION FROM THE STOCK BROKES. PURCHASE OF THES E SHARES HAS BEEN MADE IN THE EARLIER YEAR AND HAS BEEN ACCEP TED BY THE DEPT, SALE OF SHARES WHERE .DISTINCTIVE NO'S OF SHARES ARE PROVIDED SHOULD BE TREATED AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS, CONSIDERING THAT THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF THESE SH ARES WAS RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE. HOWEVER, WHERE THE APPELLA NT HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE EVEN THE DISTINCTIVE NO OF SHARES SOLD BY HIM THOUGH THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY CHEQUE, THE SALE OF SUCH SHARES SHOULD BE TREATED AS SPECULATIVE INCOME AS PER PROVISIONS OF SEC 43(5) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. 7. AFTER HEARING CONTENTIONS, I AM NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THE FACTS AS NOTED ABOVE ARE NOT IN DISPUTE. THE MATTER ALSO TRAVELED TO ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH EARLIER AND THE M ATTER WAS REMANDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPO SE OF VERIFYING THE DELIVERY OF SHARES IN ORDER TO ESTABL ISH WHETHER THE TRANSACTION OF TRANSFER OF SHARES IS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE AS INCOME FROM LO NG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OR FROM SPECULATION UNDER SECTION 43(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUE D 10 LETTERS CALLING FOR INFORMATION UNDER SECTION 133(6 ) IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE TRANSACTION AS PER DIRECTIONS O F THE TRIBUNAL BUT THE SAME WAS NOT RESPONDED BY THE PART IES EVEN ASSESSEE DID NOT BRING ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ESTABLISH THE DELIVERY OF TRAN SACTION. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL ON RECOR D, LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION TO BE SPECUL ATIVE IN NATURE. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT THERE W ERE NO DISTINCTIVE NUMBER OF SHARES, HAVE BEEN APPEARING O N THE SALE BILLS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A PPEALS) NOTED THAT WHERE DISTINCTIVE NUMBER OF SHARES ARE PROVIDED, THEY SHOULD BE TREATED AS LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN, HOWEVER, WHERE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVIDE EVE N THE DISTINCTIVE NUMBER OF SHARES, THE SAME SHOULD BE TR EATED AS SPECULATIVE INCOME. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE REFERRED TO PB-81 AND 87 WHICH ARE THE LETTERS ISSU ED BY THE STOCK BROKERS M/S BLUE CHIP INVESTMENTS AND M/S GENESIS FINANCE CO. LTD. HOWEVER, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED THAT THE SAME LETTERS WERE PRODUC ED IN EARLIER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WH ICH HAVE NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE RELIABLE, THEREFORE, IN T HE ABSENCE OF ANY FRESH EVIDENCE ON RECORD, ASSESSEE H AS FAILED TO PROVE THAT THE REMAINING TRANSACTIONS WER E DELIVERY BASED THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVI DENCE ON RECORD, LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN TREATI NG THE SALE OF SUCH SHARES TO BE TREATED AS SPECULATIVE IN COME AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43(5) OF THE ACT. THE REFORE, I 11 DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20 TH MAY, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD