ACIT, New Delhi V. Shri Subhash Chander Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 4091/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 409120114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SAHAY
• Keywords: Business income; Salary income
• Section: 133(6); 131

Judgement Text

1 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4091/DEL/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT, CIRCLE 25(1), VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA, NEW DELHI. 145, BHERA ENCLAVE, PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI. PAN: AEIPG 1546 B ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIKRAM SAHAY SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANDEEP SAPRA ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 06-01-2015 DATE OF ORDER : 20-02-2015. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:- THIS APPEAL, PREFERRED BY THE DEPARTMENT, IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29-06-2011, PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS), XXIV , NEW DELHI, IN APPEAL NO. 326/10-11, RELATING TO A.Y. 2008-09. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE- INDIVIDUAL, FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 1,57,06,840/- , WHICH COMPRISED OF INCOME FROM SALARY, HOUSE PROPERTY, CAPITAL GAINS A ND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS AIR INF ORMATION PERTAINING TO THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS AGGREGATING TO RS. 3,08,78,4 20/- AND EXPENDITURE 2 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA INCURRED AT HOTEL AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,06,018/- BY TH E ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO SHOW CAUSED THE ASSESSE E TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY KEEPING IN VIEW THE LARGE VOLUMES OF SALE & PURCHAS ES OF SHARES THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS, CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, BE NOT TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. THE ASSESSEES REPLY HAS BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WHEREIN HE, INTER ALIA, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE S INTENTION WAS TO HOLD THE SHARES BUT THE CONDITION OF THE STOCK MARKET WAS SU CH THAT HE LIQUIDATED HIS INVESTMENT. THE MAIN CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE WAS THA T THE SHARES WERE HELD AS INVESTMENT IN DEMAT ACCOUNT. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLA IM, THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED DETAILS OF SHARES TRANSACTED ALONG WITH CONTRACT NOTE, BROKER ACCOUNT, DEMAT ACCOUNT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT HE HAD T RADED IN SHARES ON ACTUAL DELIVERY BASIS ON WHICH SECURITY TRANSACTION TAX HAD BEEN PAID. IT WAS CLARIFIED THAT THE INCOME RECEIVED ON INTRADAY TRAN SACTION HAD BEEN SHOWN AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BY TREATING THE SAME AS S PECULATIVE TRANSACTION, BECAUSE THE DELIVERY HAD NOT BEEN TAKEN. THE AO, HO WEVER, POINTED OUT THAT THE CAPITAL GAINS DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE INCLUDE D GAIN OF RS. 1,24,44,090/- ON SALE OF 25000 SHARES OF LANCO INFRATECH LTD. AN D GAIN OF RS. 24,09,217/- ON SHARES OF SIX OTHER COMPANIES. HE FURTHER POINTE D OUT THAT ON PERUSAL OF DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH M/S CRIMSON FIN ANCIAL LTD., THERE WAS A TRANSACTION DATED 26-12-2007, REFERRED AS OF-CR TO 133524 TX 545538 1203590000000020, WHEREBY 25000 SHARES OF LANCO INF RATECH LTD. WERE CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WHEREAS IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN THAT THESE SHARES WE RE PURCHASED BY HIM ON 30-8-2007. HE, THEREFORE, REQUIRED M/S CRIMSON FINA NCIAL LTD. TO FURNISH INFORMATION U/S 133(6). THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL LTD. HAS ALSO BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA 2.1. THE AO, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAID REPLY, SO UGHT INFORMATION U/S 133(6) REGARDING TRANSFER OF SHARES OF M/S LANCO I NFRATECH LTD. FROM TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. THE AO ALSO ISSUED SUMMONS U/S 131 TO THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF THE SAID COMPANY AND THE REPLY FILED BY THEM HAS ALSO BEEN REPRODUCED. 2.2. THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. HAS BEEN REPRODUCED AT PAGES 6 & 7 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 2.3. FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED REPLY THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE SHARES HAD BEEN BOUGHT BY TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. THROUGH THE MAIN BROKER TO M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. ON 30-8-2007. THE C ONTRACT NOTES HAD BEEN ISSUED BY THE BROKER IN THE NAME OF TCG STOCK BROKI NG LTD.. THESE SHARES WERE LYING IN THE D-MAT ACCOUNT OF TCG STOCK BROKIN G LTD. TILL 26-12-2007, ON WHICH DATE THEY WERE TRANSFERRED TO ASSESSEES D -MAT ACCOUNT AND SOLD BY HIM ON THE SAME DAY. THE AO, THEREFORE, WAS NOT CON VINCED WITH THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS THAT THE SHARES WERE PURCHAS ED BY HIM ON 30-8-2007. HE, THEREFORE, REQUIRED THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF TC G STOCK BROKING LTD. TO FURNISH FURTHER INFORMATION, AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN PARA 12 OF AOS ORDER. THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. HAS BEEN REPRODUCED IN PARA 13 AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME AND AFTER RE CORDING THE STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. MR. A.K . GARG, DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH HAS BEEN REP RODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT 25000 SHARES OF M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. WERE BOUGHT BY HIM AT ANY 4 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA TIME BEFORE 26-10-2007, INTER ALIA, FOR THE REASON THAT THERE WAS NO CUSTOMER AGREEMENT BETWEEN TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. AND THE A SSESSEE DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08. THERE WAS NO TRIPARTITE AGR EEMENT BETWEEN M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD., MR. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA AND THE MAIN BROKER M/S CRIMSONS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., SPECIFYING TH E SCOPE OF RIGHTS AND OBLIGATION OF THE SUB BROKER, BROKER AND SUCH CLIEN TS OF SUCH BROKER AS MANDATORILY REQUIRED UNDER THE STOCK BROKER AND SUB BROKER AND SUB BROKERS REGULATIONS 1992 OF SEBI. 2.4. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIO N THAT THE SHARES WERE HELD AS INVESTMENT AND HELD THAT THIS TRANSACTION W AS AN ADVENTURE IN THE NATURE OF TRADE. HE, ACCORDINGLY, TREATED THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS INCOME FROM BUSINESS. 2.5. LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN V IEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. ROHIT ANAND 327 ITR 445, AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE STATEM ENT OF PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. MR. A.K. GARG, WHO CATEGORIC ALLY STATED ON OATH THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE SAID SHARES OF M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. ON 30-08-2007 AND THE SAID SHARES REMAINED IN THE D -MAT ACCOUNT OF M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. TILL 26-12-2007. HE FURTHER OBSERVED AS UNDER: HAVING RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SHRI A.K. GARG U NDER OATH AND HAVING COLLECTED ALL THE MATERIAL FROM M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. AND M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD . U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT, WHICH WENT ON TO PROVE THE CONTE NTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE HAD PURCHASED THE SAID SHARES ON 30-08-2007 AND GOT IT TRANSFERRED TO HIS D-MAT ACCOUNT ON 26-1 2-2007, AND 5 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA SOLD THEM ON THE SAME DATE, THE ONUS WAS NOW ON THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVE OTHERWISE. IT WAS, INCUMBENT UPON THE AO TO PROVE CONCLUSIVELY THAT THE WHOLE TRANSACTION WAS A SHAM. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS FAILED TO DO SO AND HAS MERELY POINTED OUT THAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE D-MAT ACCOU NT OF THE APPELLANT ON 26-12-2007 AND, THEREFORE, SHE HAS PRE SUMED THAT THEY WERE PURCHASED ON THE SAME DATE AND WERE SOLD ON THE SAME DATE ALSO. THIS, THUS, BECAME THE ONLY BASIS O F HER CONCLUSION THAT THE TRANSACTION SHOULD BE TREATED A S A BUSINESS TRANSACTION. 3. LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AO AND SUBMITTED T HAT SHARES WERE NOT PURCHASED ON 30-8-2007 BUT ON 26-12-2007 AND SOLD O N THE SAME DATE. THEREFORE, THIS WAS DEFINITELY AN ADVENTURE IN THE NATURE OF T RADE. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS IN FOOTWEAR BUSINESS AND OUT OF TWENTY, NINETE EN TRANSACTIONS WERE ACCEPTED BY AO AND ONLY THIS VERY TRANSACTION OF SALE OF 250 00 SHARES OF M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. WAS CONSIDERED AS AN ADVENTURE IN TH E NATURE OF TRADE. 3.1. LD. DR REFERRED TO PAGE 9 OF THE ASSESSMENT OR DER, WHEREIN PORTIONS OF STATEMENT OF A.K. GARG, PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF M/S LA NCO INFRATECH LTD. IS CONTAINED AND REFERRED TO QUESTION NO. 10 AND ANSWER THEREON, WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: Q. 10. WHAT WAS THE MODE OF PAYMENT RECEIVED BY YOU ? WAS ANY ADVANCE OR MARGIN MONEY PAID TO YOU BY SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA? ANS. 10. NO ADVANCE OR MARGIN MONEY WAS RECEIVED HOWEVER MY COMPANY & SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA BOTH HAVE DECLARING WITH CRIMSONS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., WH ICH IS THE MAIN BROKER OF NSE? THE PAYMENT FOR THE SHARES PURC HASED BY SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA WAS RECEIVED BY US 4-09-2007 TH ROUGH TRANSFER OF THE AMOUNT BY JOURNAL ENTRY FROM CRIMSO NS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. 6 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA 3.2. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO QUESTION NO. 14 AND ANS WER THERETO, WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: Q. 14. WHY WERENT THESE 25000 SHARES OF LANCO (ITL ) BOUGHT IN THE NAME OF SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA AS WAS COMMUNICA TED AND DIRECTED TO YOU BY HIM? KINDLY GIVE A DETAIL EX PLANATION. ANS. 14. THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED BY US IN OUR COD E ON BEHALF OF AND S.C.GUPTA & DELIVERED TO SUBHASH CHAN D GUPTA AS PER HIS INSTRUCTIONS. 3.3. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THESE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS THERETO HAVE TO BE READ TOGETHER FROM WHICH IT WILL BE CLEAR THAT THE PURCHASE OF SHARES WAS NOT EFFECTED ON 30-08-2007. HE SUBMITTED THAT PURCHASE OF SHARES IN HAND OF ASSESSEE CAN BE TAKEN ON THE DATE WHEN IT COMES TO HIS ACC OUNT. 3.4. AS REGARDS THE RELIANCE PLACED BY LD. CIT(A) O N THE DECISION OF ROHIT ANAND (SUPRA). LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT FACTS ARE ENTIRELY D IFFERENT IN THE SAID CASE. 3.5. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO FILE D PB CONTAINING ALL THE DETAILS RELATING TO SUMMONS, INFORMATION U/S 133(6) AND OTH ER DETAILS. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT PURC HASE/ SALES BILL HAVE NOT BEEN DENIED BY AO. THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF CROSS-EXAMIN ING MR. A.K. GARG AS ALL THE ANSWERS WERE IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR . LD. COUNSEL REFERRED TO PAGES 21 TO 23, WHEREIN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME IS CON TAINED AND POINTED OUT THAT AO ACCEPTED THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN RETURNED BY ASS ESSEE. IN REGARD TO SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN HE ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM WITH RESPECT TO SIX TRANSACTIONS BUT DENIED ONLY IN RESPECT OF M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. 7 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA 4.1. LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS EXCEPT M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. WAS THROUGH M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. AND THE TRANSACTION IN REGARD TO M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. WAS THROUGH M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD., WHO WAS SUB- BROKER OF M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. HE FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT THESE SHARES WERE ACQUIRED ON ASSESSEES BEHALF BY M/S TC G STOCK BROKING LTD., ON 30- 08-2007 AND THESE WERE HELD BY ASSESSEE FOR MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DAYS OUT OF ALL THE OTHER TRANSACTIONS. IN CASE OF REST OF SHARES, THE SALE TOOK PLACE FROM ONE DAY TO ONE MONTH 11 DAYS. 4.2. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO PAGES 37 AND 38 OF PB WHEREIN STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FROM 1-4-2007 TO 31-3-2008 OF ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD., IS CONTAINED, TO DEMONSTRAT E THAT ON 30-08-2007 IN ASSESSEES ACCOUNT, M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD., HA D PURCHASED 25000 SHARES. LD. COUNSEL FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGES 47 TO 71, WHE REIN THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. I S CONTAINED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT A SUM OF RS. 74,83,706.44 WAS DEBITED TO ASSESSEES ACCOUNT ON THE BASIS OF JOURNAL ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. 4.3. LD. COUNSEL REFEFERRED TO PAGE 56 OF DEPARTMEN TS PB, WHEREIN ALSO THE STATEMENT OF ASSESSEES ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. IS CONTAINED, WHICH ALSO SHOWS THE SAME ENTRY . HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGES 70 TO 76 OF THE PB TO DEMONSTRATE THAT M/S LANCO I NFRATECH LTD. SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO ASSESSEES D-MAT ACCOUNT ON 26-12-20 07 FROM M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD RUNNING ACCOUNT WITH M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. 8 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA 4.4. LD. COUNSEL FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGES 39 TO 44 OF ASSESSEES PB TO DEMONSTRATE THAT M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. HAD IS SUED PURCHASE BILLS TO ASSESSEE ON 30-8-2007. LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ALL THESE DOCUMENTS CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED BY ASSESSE E ON 30-08-2007. HE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT SALE BILLS ISSUED BY M/S CRIMSON F INANCIAL SERVICES LTD. DATED 26- 12-2007 ARE CONTAINED FROM PAGES 72 TO 95 OF THE PB . HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGE 94 OF THE PB TO DEMONSTRATE THAT ASSESSEE HAD PAID STT CHARGES OF RS. 24856/-. LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE NOT BEE N CONTROVERTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGES 101 TO 105 OF THE PB, WHEREIN THE STATEMENT OF SHRI A.K. GARG IS CONTAINED, WHO CATEG ORICALLY CONFIRMED THE PURCHASE OF SHARES ON ASSESSEES BEHALF ON 30-08-20 07. 4.5. LD. COUNSEL FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGES 107 TO 1 08 OF THE PB, WHEREIN THE REPLY TO NOTICE U/S 133(6) OF M/S CRIMSON FINANCIAL SERVI CES LTD. DATED 26-8-2010, IS CONTAINED, IN WHICH, INTER ALIA, IT IS CONFIRMED TH AT 25000 SHARES OF M/S LANCO INFRATECH LTD. HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE D-MAT A/ C OF SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA FROM M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTE D THAT ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED THE PRIMARY ONUS THAT LAY UPON HIM AND, THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) RIGHTLY CONCLUDED THAT IMPUGNED SHARES WERE HELD BY ASSESSE E AS ITS INVESTMENT AND WERE TAXABLE AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON ITS TRANSFER. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAV E PERUSED THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE EVIDENCE ON RECOR D HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY ASSESSEE FOR ESTABLISHING THAT THE SHARES WERE PURC HASED ON 30-08-2007 BY M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. ON ASSESSEES BEHALF, HAS NO T AT ALL BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS A SIMPLE CASE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES BY AN INDIVIDUAL THROUGH 9 ITA 4091/DEL/2011 ACIT VS. SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA BROKER, WHO HELD THE SHARES IN ITS D-MAT A/C TILL THE TRANSFER OF THE SHARES IN D-MAT ACCOUNT ON THE DATE WHEN THE ASSESSEE INTENDED TO S ELL THE SAME. THE BROKER WAS HOLDING SHARES ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE BECAUSE CONSID ERATION WAS PAID BY ASSESSEE THROUGH JOURNAL ENTRY IN THE RUNNING A/C OF ASSESSE E WITH BROKER. IT IS A NORMAL SHARE TRADING TRANSACTION IN SUPPORT OF WHICH ALL T HE INGREDIENTS REGARDING PURCHASE AND SALES WERE FULLY ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. M ERELY BECAUSE THE SHARES WERE KEPT IN THE BROKERS CODE FROM 30-8-2007 TILL 26-12- 2007, ON WHICH DATE THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO ASSESSEES D-MAT ACCOUNT WITH M AIN BROKER, CANNOT BE THE BASIS FOR COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACTUAL PURCHA SE TOOK PLACE ON 26-12-2007 BY ASSESSEE. IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF SUB-BROKER, TH E PURCHASE WAS RECORDED IN ASSESSEES ACCOUNT ON 30-8-2007 AND THE SHARES WERE D-MATED IN ASSESSEES ACCOUNT BY PRINCIPAL BROKER ON 26-12-2007 FROM THE SUB-BROKERS ACCOUNT CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED SHARES ON 30-8-2007, WHICH WERE HELD ON ASSESSEES BEHALF BY M/S TCG STOCK BROKING LTD. THE SOLE REASON ASSIGNED BY AO FOR COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE SHARES WER E HELD AS STOCK IN TRADE WAS THAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED ON THE SAME DATE O N WHICH IT WAS PURCHASED. THIS FINDING IS COMPLETELY ERRONEOUS ON THE FACE OF IT I N THE BACK DROP OF EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD. WE ACCORDINGLY, CONFIRM THE ORDE R OF CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20-02-2015. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU ) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 20-02-2015. MP: C OPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR