The ACIT, Circle-6, Surat V. Smt. Kanta Goyal, Surat

ITA 1858/AHD/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8887 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 23-09-2009
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2005
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: U S RAINA
• Assessee Lawyers: S KABRA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 131; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI T. K. SHARMA, JM AND N. S. SAINI, AM ) ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 A. Y.: 2002-03 THE A. C. I. T., CIRCLE-6, SURAT, ROOM NO. 218, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT VS SMT. KANTA GOYAL, 268-270, GIDC, PANDESARA, SURAT, PA NO. ACLPG 5727 H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI U. S. RAINA, DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. KABRA, AR O R D E R PER T. K. SHARMA: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-IV, SURAT DATED 12-05-2005 RELA TING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READS AS UNDER: 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL. THE ASSESSEE IS BORN AND BROUGHT UP IN CALCUTTA. HE R HUSBAND IS ALSO FROM CALCUTTA. AFTER MARRIAGE, BOTH OF THEM SHIFTED TO SURAT FOR THEIR LIVELIHOOD, HOWEVER, THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS ARE STILL RESIDING AT CALCUTTA. THE ASSESSEE IS BASICALLY A HOUSEWIFE EARNS INTERES T AND DIVIDEND INCOME. IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESS EE EARNED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.14,15,750/- ON SALE OF 25000 SHA RES OF M/S. GAUTAM RESOURCES LTD. THE APPLICABLE TAX @10% ON THIS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND NORMAL TAX ON OTHER INCOME WAS DULY PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO SELECTED THE CASE FOR SCRUTINY AND ASKED THE ASSESS EE TO PROVE THE ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 2 TRANSACTIONS ON SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES. WITH R EGARD TO THIS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED AS UNDER: (I) CONTRACT NOTE OF THE REGISTERED SHARE BROKER I N RESPECT OF SHARES PURCHASED. (II) DETAILS OF S. FOLIO NUMBER, CERTIFICATE NUMBER AND DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS OF SHARES PURCHASED ALONG WITH THE LETTER OF TRANSFER ISSUED BY THE COMPANY. (III) CONTRACT NOTE OF THE REGISTERED SHARE BROKER IN RES PECT OF SHARES SOLD. (IV) DETAILS OF PAYMENT RECEIVED VIDE ACCOUNT PAYEE DEMAND DRAFT SENT BY THE BROKER (V) THE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE REGISTERED SHAR E BROKER EVIDENCING THE AMOUNT SENT. (VI) COPY OF DEMAT ACCOUNT EVIDENCING THE PHYSICAL DELIVERY OF SHARES. (VII) CONFIRMATION OF THE BROKER GIVING COMPLETE DETAILS OF TRANSACTION (VIII) NAME, ADDRESS AND PAN OF EVEN THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD. (IX) AFFIDAVIT OF THE SHARE BROKER CONFIRMING THE TRANSA CTION AS ALSO HIS SON CLARIFYING ANY CONFUSION ARISING IN RESPONSE TO THEIR STATEMENT WRITTEN BY THE ACIT, CI R, 32, KOLKATTA. 4. THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 132 OF THE ACT TO BOTH THE BUYERS AND SELLERS I.E. FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED AND S OLD THE SHARES. BUT BOTH THE NOTICES WERE RETURNED UN-SERVED BY THE POS TAL DEPARTMENT WITH THE REMARKS NOT KNOWN. FURTHER, TO VERIFY THE GEN UINENESS OF ABOVE MENTIONED TRANSACTIONS THE COMMISSION U/S 131(1D) O F THE IT ACT WAS ISSUED TO ACIT, CIRCLE-32, CALCUTTA ON 26-7-2004. A CCORDINGLY, CONCERNED ACIT, CALCUTTA SENT HIS REPORT VIDE LETTER DATED 10 -01-2007. IN HIS REPORT, HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 131 O F THE ACT OF MR. ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 3 ADITYA CHIRIMAR, SON OF MR. BASANTKUMAR CHIRIMAR. O N THE BASIS OF THIS STATEMENT THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THE SAID BROKER HAS CREATED SPECULATION GAIN IN THE ASSESSEES NAME AND SO CREATED SPECULAT ION GAIN WAS UTILIZED TO PURCHASE 25000 SHARES OF GAUTAM RESOURCES LTD. T HE AO ACCORDINGLY IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONVERTED HER UNACCOUNTED INCOME INTO LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND THERE IS NO SCOPE LEFT FOR ANY DOUBT IN RESPECT OF THIS FACT. THE IN THE A SSESSMENT ORDER HAS ALSO STATED THAT FROM THE CHAIN OF FUNDS STATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, ANY PRUDENT MAN WILL UNDERSTAND, LEAD TO WHEN INESC APABLE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONVERTED HER UNACCOUNTED /UN DISCLOSED INCOME OF RS 14,66,250/- INTO LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN SO AS T O AVOID PAYING TAX AT HIGHER RATE. HE ACCORDINGLY, TREATED THE ENTIRE CAP ITAL GAIN OF RS.14,66,250/- AS NORMAL INCOME AND TAXED THE SAME ACCORDINGLY INSTEAD OF TAXING THE SAME @10% AS LONG TERM CAPITA L GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES. 5. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) ASSESSEE MADE THE FO LLOWING SUBMISSIONS: I. THE APPELLANT AND HER FAMILY ARE ORIGINALLY KOL KATANS AND SHE IS A HOUSEWIFE DERIVING INTEREST AND DIVIDEND INCOM E AS HAS BEEN INVESTING IN SHARES, THROUGH THE DE-MAT ACCOUNT ON THE ADVISE OF FAMILY MEMBERS. TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID. II. 25,000 SHARES OF THE GAUTAM RESOURCES LTD. A LI STED PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY WERE PURCHASED FOR RS.50,5007- THRO UGH SHRI BASANT KUMAR CHIRIMAR, A REGISTERED SHARE BROKER HA VING SEBI REGISTRATION NO.LNB 030513217 AND COPY OF THE CONTR ACT NOTE HAS BEEN ENCLOSED. III. THE APPELLANT GOT THE SHARES TRANSFERRED TO HER NAME AND HAS FILED A COPY OF THE TRANSFER LETTER WHICH IS DATED 16-8-2000, THE SAME HAVING BEEN FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO WHERE TRANSFER NUMBER, FOLIO NUMBER, CERTIFICATE NUMBERS AND DISTI NCTIVE NUMBERS HAVE BEEN CLEARLY SPELT OUT AND ALSO THE PROOF OF T RANSFER. ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 4 IV. AFTER 14 MONTHS SINCE THE SHARES HAD SHOW N SHARP RISE, THE SAME WERE SOLD AND COPY OF THE CONTRACT NOTE WAS AL SO FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE SALE- CONSIDERATION WAS RECEIVED BY ACCOUNT PAYEE DEMAND DRAFT AND THE SAME WAS DEPOSIT ED IN THE APPELLANT'S ACCOUNT. SINCE THE SHARES WERE ALSO ROU TED THROUGH THE DE-MAT ACCOUNT, THE DELIVERY OF THE SHARES WAS NOT DISPUTED. V. THE APPELLANT STATES THAT THE TRANSACTION IS NOT A PAPER TRANSACTION, AND THERE IS FULL PROOF OF THE DELIVER Y OF THE SHARES. IN HER DE-MAT ACCOUNT, THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO SHOWN TR ANSACTIONS OF OTHER SHARES SUCH AS ACC, L&T, ICICI LTD., ESSAR OI L ETC. IN ADDITION OF THE SHARES OF M/S.GAUTAM RESOURCES LTD. THIS TRA NSACTION IS, THEREFORE, NOT AN ISOLATED TRANSACTION, IT IS EMPHA SIZED. VI. THE CONFIRMATION OF THE BROKER WAS ALSO S UBMITTED WHEREAS THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS STATED TO BASE HIS ORDER O N CONJECTURES, SURMISES, DOUBTS AND THE PREPONDERANCE OF POSSIBILI TY. IN FACT, IT IS STATED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONDUCTED SEVERAL INQUIRIES FOR CROSS-VERIFICATION OF THE SAID TRANSACTIONS BUT AT EVERY STAGE, THE APPELLANT'S CASE GOT STRENGTHENED. IT IS STATED THA T THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE WROTE A LETTER TO SEBI / STOCK E XCHANGE TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE REGISTERED SHARE BROKER AND NO ADVERSE MATERIAL WAS UNCOVERED. VII. INQUIRY U/S.133(6) WITH THE BANKER OF THE SHARE BROKER ALSO REFLECTED NO CASH DEPOSITS AND THE ABN AMRO BANK IN WHICH THE BROKER HAS ACCOUNT CONFIRMED THE PAYMENT AND THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT BEFORE THE PAYMENT. IT IS STATED THAT THE S HARE BROKER ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAFER* TRANSACTION IN RESPONSE TO NOT ICE U/S. 133(3) INCLUDING THE DETAILS OF THE PARTIES FROM WHOM THE SHARE WERE PURCHASED AND TO WHOM THE SHARE WERE SOLD. IT IS ST ATED THAT THE INQUIRY WITH THE BUYER AND SELLER OF THE SHARES WAS IRRELEVANT SINCE THE APPELLANT WAS ONLY CONCERNED WITH THE SHARE BRO KER HOWEVER THE APPELLANT HAD OBTAINED THE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY BOTH THE SUBSEQUENT BUYER AND TH E EARLIER SELLER, ALONG WITH THEIR PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AND ADDRE SS, RETURN OF INCOME ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, COPIES OF WHICH ARE ENCLOSE D. VIII. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THESE ARE PRIVATE L IMITED COMPANIES WHOSE DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ROC AND SINCE THE I.T. DETAILS WERE ALSO FURNISHED, THE IDENTITY COULD HAVE BEEN C ROSS-VERIFIED BUT ASSESSING OFFICER ERRONEOUSLY STATED THAT HE WAS UN ABLE TO LOCATE THE OFFICE. IX. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ISSUED A COMMISSION U /S.131(1)(D) TO THE ACIT, CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA BUT SINCE THE BROKE R HIMSELF WAS ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 5 SERIOUSLY HOSPITALISED, HIS SON'S STATEMENT WAS REC ORDED IN A MECHANICAL MANNER AND BY PUTTING MENTAL PRESSURE ON HIM FOR 12 HOURS FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE DAYS, SHRI ADITYA CHIRIMA R IN HIS STATEMENT AT VARIOUS PLACES STATED THAT HE WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY SUCH PRE-ARRANGED TRANSACTIONS, AND ACCORDING TO HI M, THE TRANSACTIONS WERE GENUINE. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 6, HE STATED THAT HE WAS MERELY THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM TRANSACTIONS WERE CARRIED OUT FOR WHICH HE RECEIVED THE BROKERAGE. X. MOREOVER, THE APPELLANT STATES THAT THE STATEMEN T OF THIS PERSON IS IRRELEVANT SINCE HE WAS NOT THE BROKER BU T ONLY THE SON OF THE BROKER AND IS SEPARATELY CARRYING OUT HIS BUSIN ESS IN THE NAME OF M/S.CHIRIMAR & ASSOCIATES WHEREAS M/S.BASANT KUM AR CHIRIMAR IS THE PROPRIETARY CONCERN OF HIS FATHER. IT IS FUR THER STATED THAT THE STATEMENT ON WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER RELIES HAS BEEN DENIED BY BOTH THE BROKER AND THE SON AND FOR THIS PURPOSE, A FFIDAVITS HAVE BEEN FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER DIRECTLY SI NCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATED THAT HE HAD NO FAX OTHERWISE THE AFF IDAVITS COULD HAVE BEEN FAXED TO HIM BEFORE THE PASSING OF THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER. XI. IT IS ALSO STATE THAT THE SHOW CAUSE NOTI CE ALONG WITH THE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE BROKER WAS GIVEN TO THE APP ELLANT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ONLY ON 18-3-2005 I.E. 10 DAYS BE FORE THE PASSING OF THE ORDER AND, WHICH LEFT LITTLE TIME FOR THE BR OKER TO CLARIFY HIS STAND FROM KOLKATA. EVEN THE ACIT, CIRCLE-32, KOLKA TA DID NOT PROVIDE THE COPY OF THE STATEMENT TO SHRI ADITYA CH IRIMAR. IT IS STATED THAT THE AFFIDAVITS REACHED THE ASSESSING OFFICER B EFORE 31-3-2005 BUT THIS WAS NOT TAKEN COGNISANCE OF. XII. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THERE WAS NO OP PORTUNITY ALLOWED TO EXAMINE THE SON OF THE BROKER. XIII. RELIANCE IS PLACED BY THE APPELLANT ON TH E FOLLOWING CASE LAWS :- (1) THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GIT V. DHAVAN INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD. (1999) 238 ITR 486 (G AL.) HAS HELD THAT AS THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS WERE MADE THROUGH RE GISTERED BROKER OF STOCK EXCHANGE AND THE QUOTATION OF SHARES HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE CORRECT AS PER RECORD OF STOCK EXCHANGE, THE TRIBUN AL WAS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING THE SHARE LOSS IN THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES. (2) IN THE CASE OF ITO V. VINEET ENQQ. & TRADING CO . LTD. (1993) 45 TTJ (CAL) 624 THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA BENCH OF THE ITAT HAS HELD TH AT THE MATERIALS PLACED ON RECORD SHOW THAT THE ASSESS EE HAD APPLIED FOR THE SHARES AND HAD PAID THE SUM BY CHEQUE, THE SAID SHARES WERE ACTUALLY ALLOTTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THAT THE IR DISTINCTIVE ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 6 NUMBER WERE NLII GIVEN. THE ASSESSEE SOLD THESE SHA RE TO A SHARE BROKER AND RECEIVED THE PAYMENT BY CHEQUE AND THUS THE FACTUAL POSITION EMERGING FROM THE RECORD WAS THAT THERE IS NOTHING TO PROVE ALLEGED TAX PLANNING ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AN D THE TRANSACTION WAS TO BE ACCEPTED AS GENUINE. (3) THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. CURRENCY INVESTMENT CO. LTD. (2000) 241 ITR 494 (CAL) HAS HE LD THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES FROM WHOM IT PURCHASED SHARES AND TO WHOM IT SOLD THE SHARES AND ALSO PRODUCED THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM SHARES WERE PURCHASED AND A LL THE RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS WERE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CH EQUES, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS CANNOT BE DENIED ME RELY BECAUSE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD OR THE BUYER AND SHARES WERE DELIVERED 10 -15 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF SALE AND THE LOSS IN SHARE TRANSACTIONS IN ALLOWABLE. (4) IN THE CASE OF FARIDABAD INVESTMENT CO. LTD. V. ITO (1990) 34 ITD (CAL) 190, THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA BENCH OF ITAT HAS H ELD THAT WHERE THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD DID NOT ALLOW TO DRAW THE IN FERENCE THAT THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS EFFECTED BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF PURCHASING AND SELLING OF SHARES WERE NOT GENUINE, LOSS INCURR ED IN THE TRANSACTIONS COULD NOT BE DISALLOWED. (5) IN THE CASE OF DUDHORIA CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. V . ITO (1992) 43 TTJ (CAL) 280, HON'BLE CALCUTTA BENCH OF ITAT HAS H ELD THAT THE ITO'S RECORD SHOWS THAT ASSESSEE HAD FILED SUPPORTI NG EVIDENCE AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE PROVING THE TRANSACTION. THE P URCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS WERE MADE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE C HEQUES AND THE SAME HAD BEEN VERIFIED BY THE ITO AND IN THE SA ID CIRCUMSTANCES THE ITO COULD NOT SUSPECT THE TRANSACTION TO BE SHA M AND AND THEREBY DISALLOW THE LOSS INCURRED THEREIN. IT WAS ALSO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE PUT TO PREJUDICE OR SUFFERANCE F OR IN-ACTION ON THE ART OF THE ITO IN CONDUCTING INQUIRY. XIV. ON THE ISSUE OF NOT BRINGING THE BROTHER-I N-LAW, SHRI HARGOVIND GOYAL BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HE REQUESTED ON 9-3-2005, IT IS STATED THAT THIS PERSON COULD NOT G ET HIS TRAIN RESERVATION AND IN FACT A COPY OF THE RAILWAY TICKE T TO SHOW THAT RESERVATION WAS UNAVAILABLE WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS, THE LEARNED CIT(A) TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE AO MADE THE ADDITION ON CON JECTURE AND SURMISES ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 7 AND BY IGNORING THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO HELD THAT SHARES PURCHASED AND SOLD WERE OF PUBLIC LIMIT ED COMPANY WHICH WERE QUOTED IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE. THE PAYMENT OF S ALE CONSIDERATION WAS RECEIVED BY CHEQUE, THERE WAS NOTHING TO PROVE THE ALLEGED TAX PLANNING ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AND TRANSACTIO NS HAS TO BE ACCEPTED AS GENUINE. HE ACCORDINGLY, DIRECTED THE AO TO TREA T THE AMOUNT OF RS.14,66,650/- AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND NOT AS INCOME FROM UNACCOUNTED SOURCES. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, SHRI U. S. RAINA, LEARNED DR APPEARED AND RELYING ON THE REASONING GI VEN BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LI VING IN SURAT, THERE WAS NO NECESSITY FOR MAKING THE SALE AND PURCHASE O F SHARES IN CALCUTTA. THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IS NOT VERIFIABLE. THE STATEMENT OF SON OF THE BROKER RECORDED CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE ASSE SSEE USED THE SERVICE OF THE BROKER, IN ORDER TO CREATE SPECULATION GAIN. OUT OF THIS SPECULATION GAIN INVESTMENTS IN 25000 SHARES OF GAUTAM RESOURCE S LTD. WAS MADE CHAIN OF EVENTS INITIATED BY THE AO CLEARLY INDICAT ES THAT IN ORDER TO PAT TAX AT LOWER RATE, THE ASSESSEE HAS CONVERTED HER U NACCOUNTED INCOME INTO LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THEREFORE, THE AO IS L EGALLY AND FACTUALLY CORRECT IN TAXING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM UNACCOUNT ED SOURCES. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI S. KABRA, LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESS EE POINTED OUT THAT THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED. THESE WERE KEPT IN DEMAT ACCOUNT. DELIVERY OF SHARES WAS GIVEN THOUGH DEMAT ACCOUNT. THE AO RE JECTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE ON DOUBT AND SUSPICION AND THE CIT(A) IS LEGALLY CORRECT IN DIRECTING THE AO TO TAX ON THE P ROFIT EARNED ON SALE OF SHARES AMOUNTING TO RS.14,66,650/- AS LONG TERM CAP ITAL GAIN. 8. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE AO IS NOT MAKING THE ITA NO.1858/AHD/2005 SMT. KANTA GOYAL 8 ADDITION OF SPECULATION GAIN OF RS.50,500/-. AS A M ATTER OF FACT, THE AO ACCEPTED THE PURCHASE PRICE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AN D SOURCE OF ITS INVESTMENT. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE S HARES IN QUESTION AFTER HOLDING THE SAME FOR MORE THAN 12 MONTHS. THE ASSESSEE EARNED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WHICH IS TAXABLE @10%. THE A O TREATED THE SAME AS INCOME FROM UNACCOUNTED SOURCES ON DOUBT AND SUS PICION. LOOKING TO THE VARIOUS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE BOTH THE DEPA RTMENTAL AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS G IVEN COGENT REASON FOR DIRECTING THE AO TO TREAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.14,00,00 0/- AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. WE, THEREFORE, DECLINE TO INTERFERE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23-09-2009 SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (T. K. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 23-09-2009 LAKSHMIKANT/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD