ITO 31(2)(2), MUMBAI V. KALPANA M RUIA, MUMBAI

ITA 4130/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0884 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Cost of acquisition; Speculation loss; Accommodation entries; Penny stocks
• Section: 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/ SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) & AMARJIT SINGH (JM) I.T.A. NO. 4130 /MUM /20 1 5 (ASSESSMENT Y EAR 20 0 7 - 0 8 ) I .T.A. NO. 4131/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09) ITO 31(2)(2) 709, C - 11, PRATYAKS HAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST MUMBAI - 400 051. VS. SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA FLAT NO. 2102, B WING KRISHNA VATIKA MARG GOKULDHAM GOREGAON - E MUMBAI - 400 063. PAN : AANPR6250J ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI J.P.BAIRAGRA DEP ARTMENT BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SINGH DATE OF HEARING 01 .1 1 . 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 . 11 . 201 8 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (A M) : - BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 41, MUMBA I AND THEY RELATE TO A.YS. 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION RELATING TO BOGUS CAPITAL GAIN IN BOTH YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 2. SINCE THE ISSUES URGED IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICA L IN NATURE, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 3. THE REVENUE CARRIED OUT SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS U/S. 132 OF THE ACT IN THE HANDS OF M/S. MAHASAGAR SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ITS GROUP COMPANIES, WHICH ARE CONTROLLED BY A PERSON NAMED SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI. IT WAS NOTICED THAT THESE COMPANIES WERE ENGAGED IN ISSUING BOGUS BILLS FOR PROVIDING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN/LOSS, SPECULATION LOSS/PROFIT ETC . IT WAS NOTICED BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED SHARE S FROM M/S. ALLIANCE SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 2 INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD., ONE OF THE GROUP COMPAN IES OF SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI. HENCE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT OF BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED RELEVANT DETAILS TO PROVE THE PURC HASE AND SALE OF SHARES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND LATER ON SOLD T HROUGH ANOTHER BROKER NAMED M/S. KOTAK SECURITIES LIMITED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY A FEW DAYS BEFORE THE DATE OF SALE. FURTHER, S INCE THE TRANSACTIONS DONE BY M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD. , WERE CONSIDERED TO BE BOGUS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EX PLAIN SOURCES OF PURCHASE OF SHARES. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED BOTH PURCHASE VALUE AND SALE VALUE OF SHARES AGGREGATING TO RS 85.90 LAKHS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IN A.Y. 2007 - 08 . SIMILARLY THE AO ASSESSED RS 81.28 LAKHS RELATING TO PURCHASE AND SALE VALUE OF SHARES IN A.Y. 2008 - 09 AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 4. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER IN BOTH THE YEARS. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE FILED THESE APPEALS BEFORE US. 5. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE COMPANIES BELONGING TO SH RI MUKESH CHOKSI HAS ACCEPTED THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND ACCORDINGLY DECLARED COMMISSION INCOME ON THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY THEM HE SUBMITTED THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS ALSO DETERMINED COMMISSION INCOME @ 0.15%. AC CORDINGLY, THE LEARNED DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER SO PASSED IN THE CASE OF SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI GROUP COMPANIES CLEARLY PROVED THAT THEY WERE PROVIDING ON LY ACCOMMODATION BILLS. THE LD D.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE REPORT GIVEN BY INVESTIGATION WIN G AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE S WOULD SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT HAVE PURCHASED SHARE S THROUGH SHRI SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 3 MUKESH CHOKSI GROUP. THE LEARNED DR, IN PARTICULAR, INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE REPORT OF INVESTIGA TION WING, WHEREIN IT IS STATED THAT BROKER LICENCE OF M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD. HAS BEEN CANCELLED. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE MAIN LICENSE OF M/S ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK P LTD WAS NOT CANCELLED AND IT IS ONLY THE SUB - BROKERS LICENCE W AS CANCEL LED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD. HAS REPORTED SHARE TRANSACTION DETAILS TO THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND HENCE SHARES PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THEM HAVE BEEN DULY REFLECTED IN ANNUAL INFORMATION REPOR T RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ALSO MENTIONED THE SAME IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALSO. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS FACT ALONE WOULD PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED SHARES THROUGH M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT . LTD. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENTS FOR PURCHASES THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE GENERAL STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI. HE SUBMITTED THAT SHRI MUKESH CH OKSI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS BOGUS IN NATURE. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED SHARES OF REPUTED COMPANIES LIKE SUNDARAM MULTI, MICRO TECHO, ALCHEMIST, HINDUSTAN ZINC, APTECH ETC. THESE S HARES DO NOT FALL UNDER THE CATEGORY OF PEN NY STOCK . HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY SHARE TRANSACTIONS UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THESE SHARES HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER SOLD THROUGH ANOTHER REPUTED BROKER M/S. KOTAK SECURITIES LTD . ACCORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. THE LD A.R ALSO PLACED HIS RELIANCE, INTER ALIA, ON FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: - (A) CIT VS. PINAK IN L SHAH (ITA 3380 OF 2010 DATED 18 - 01 - 2012)(BOM) (B) ARVIND ASMAL MEHTA VS. ITO (ITA NO.2799/MUM/2015)(MUM - TRIB) (C) SMT. SARITA DEVI VS. ITO (ITA NO.1228/HYD/2016)(HYD - TRIB) SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 4 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NOTICED T HAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN A.Y. 2007 - 08 WITH FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS : - 3.8 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT, IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. DURING THE COURSE OF THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE APPELLANT FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS MADE DURING THE YEAR ALONGWITH THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES, SALES BILLS OF SHARES SOLD THROUGH KOTAK SECURITIES, SCRIPWIS E DETAILS OF SHARES PURCHASED AND SOLD AND BANK STATEMENTS. ON A PERUSAL OF THE SAME, IT APPEARS THAT THE APPELLANT HAD ENTERED INTO THE TRANSACTIONS WITH M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD FOR THE PURCHASE OF SHARES AS UNDER SCRIPT SHARES PURCHASED FROM NO. OF SHARES SHARES SOLD THROUGH NO. OF SHARES ALCHEMIST LTD. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES 90000 KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. 90000 MICRO TECHNO LTD. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES 5000 KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. 5000 APTECH LTD. BALANCE B/FD 1050 0 KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. 10500 SUNDARAM MULTI ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES 30000 KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. 30000 JAI CORP ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES 1050 BALANCE C/FD HINDUSTAN ZINC ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES 2200 KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. 2200 THESE S HARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO KOTAK SECURITIES ACCOUNT AND THEREAFTER, SOLD THROUGH KOTAK SECURITIES. 3.9 THE APPELLANT ALSO BOUGHT ON RECORD THAT 'ALL THE SHARES SOLD THROUGH KOTAK SECURITIES COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SOLD HAD THEY NOT BEEN GENUINELY PURCHASED BY THE APPELLANT. EVEN IF IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE SHARES WERE FIRST SOLD THROUGH KOTAK SECURITIES THEN THE APPELLANT WOULD HAVE HAD TO PURCHASE THE SHARES TO SQUARE OFF THE TRANSACTIONS. YOUR HONOUR MAY KINDLY NOTE FROM THE DATE - WISE SCRIP REPORT THAT THE APPE LLANT HAS NOT PURCHASED THE SAME SHARES SUBSEQUENTLY AFTER THE DATE OF SALE. THUS, IT CAN BE SAFELY AND EASILY CONCLUDED THAT THE SALES HAVE TAKEN PLACE AFTER PURCHASES ONLY AND THAT ALL PURCHASES ARE GENUINE.' THE SALE OF THE SHARES CAN BE EVIDENCED FROM THE SCRIPWISE DETAILS OF SHARES PURCHASED AND SOLD. SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 5 3.10 FURTHER, AS REGARDS THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO THAT THE APPELLANT HAD TRANSFERRED SHARES TO KOTAK FEW DAYS BEFORE THE SALE, THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT : - 1. THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVE D IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO KOTAK ACCOUNT FEW DAYS BEFORE THE SALE. A. IN THIS REGARD, AT THE OUTSET, THE APPELLANT FIRSTLY WISHES TO CLARIFY THAT IT IS ENTIRELY UPTO THE APPELLANT'S CHOICE AND PREROGATIVE AS TO HOW AND WHEN THE SHARES SHOULD BE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE DEMAT ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER. THE SHARE MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE DEMAT ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER DEMAT ACCOUNT EITHER IMMEDIATELY ON PURCHASE OR AFTER HOLDING THEM FOR SOME PERIOD OR JUST BEFORE EXECUTING THE SALES TRANSACTION. THIS TRANSFER OF SHARES FROM ONE DEMAT ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER CANNOT CHANGE THE HOLDING PERIOD OF THE SHARES OR CHALLENGE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THIS PREROGATIVE IS ENTIRELY OF THE APPELLANT AND THE FACT THAT ALL THE GAINS/P ROFIT HAVE BEEN COMPUTED CORRECTLY AND OFFERED TO TAX AS PER THE TAX LAWS RELIEVES THE APPELLANT OF ALL THE OBLIGATIONS THAT MAY ARISE OUT OF THE PURCHASE/SALE TRANSACTION. B. SECONDLY, THE VERY FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATED T HAT THE SHARES WERE TRANSFERRED TO KOTAK FEW DAYS BEFORE SALE, CLEARLY IMPLIES THAT THE APPELLANT HAD MADE GENUINE PURCHASED. IF THE PURCHASED WOULD HAVE BEEN BOGUS (AS ALLEGED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER), THE SHARES COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED TO KOTAK SECURITIES DEMAT ACCOUNT. C. THUS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONTRADICTING HIS OWN STATEMENTS BY FIRST HOLDING THAT THE SHARES PURCHASED ARE BOGUS AND THEN ADMITTING TO THE FACT THAT THE SHARES ARE TRANSFERRED TO KOTAK SECURITIES ACCOUNT FEW DAYS BEFORE SALE.' 3.11 THE APPELLANT HAS SUBSTANTIATED THE GENUINENESS OF PURCHASES BY SUBMITTING THE SCRIP WISE SALES DETAILS WHICH CLEARLY REFLECTS THAT THE SALES MADE WERE NO SHORT SALES (I.E. SALES MADE PRIOR TO PURCHASES) AS NO SQUARE OFF ENTRIES HAVE BEEN MAD E SUBSEQUENTLY. KOTAK SECURITIES WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED OR CONSIDERED SUCH SHORT SALE TRANSACTIONS UNTIL THEY WERE SQUARED OFF DURING THE YEAR. THE VERY FACT THAT NO PURCHASES OF THE SAME SCRIP HAVE BEEN MADE SUBSEQUENTLY TO REFLECT THE COVERING OF THE SAL ES MADE, CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE SALES HAVE BEEN MADE ONLY AFTER PURCHASES. THE APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED THE SHARES THROUGH ALLIANCE AND SOLD THROUGH KOTAK SECURITIES. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ALLIANCE WITH THE BANK ACCOUNT SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 6 STATEMENT EVIDENCING THE DETAILS OF PAYMENTS MADE FOR THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS EFFECTED THROUGH ALLIANCE. FURTHER, THE APPELLANT ALSO DREW THE ATTENTION TO THE CASE OF SHRI ROOPCHAND H. MEHTA V. ITO 14(1)(2), ITA NO.5027/MUM/2007 WHEREIN THE MUMBAI BENCH G SMC) HAS HELD THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE BY MR. MUKESH CHOKSHI IS NOT WORTHY TO BE ACCEPTED AS IN THE CROSS EXAMINATION HE HAS ADMITTED THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE GENUINE AND THEREAFTER, HE AGAIN CONTROVERTED THE SAME. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO RELIED ON THE DE CISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ADIT V. MISS LATA MANGESHKAR, 97 ITR 696 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT W HERE THE EVIDENCE SUFFERED FROM S EVERE INFIRMITIES, THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE MADE IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE MERE LY ON THE BASIS OF THE ENTRIES FOUND IN THE THIRD PARTY BOOKS. THE STATEMENT OF MR. MUKESH CHOKSHI STATES THAT HE HAD MAINLY ISSUED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD, GOLDSTAR FINVEST AND MAHASAGAR SECURITIES. T HE AO HAS RELIED ON THE SAID STATEMENT WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACT OF THE QUANTUM AND VALUE OF THE ENTRIES ENTERED INTO BY THE APPELLANT WITH M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD AND THE ENTRIES ALREADY RECORDED BY THE APPELLANT FOR WHICH ALL THE SUPPORTING DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPELLANT TO THE AO. FURTHER, THE AO HAS BEEN UNABLE TO VERIFY THE DETAILS CLAIMED BY MR. MUKESH CHOKSHI THROUGH M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK PVT. LTD OF THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED TH ROUGH THE NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE OF INDIA. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND ACCORDINGLY I DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.85,90,257/ - MADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 8. W E HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING REGULAR DEALINGS IN SHARES AND DECLARING INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS IN THE EARLIER YEARS ALSO. THE ASSESSEE HAS CARRIED OUT NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES. THE AO HAS DOUBTED ONLY THE TRANSACTIONS RELATING TO SHARES PURCHASED FROM M/S ALLIANCE INTERMEDIARIES & NETWORK P LTD, SINCE IT WAS A COMPANY BELONGING TO MUKESH CHOKSI GROUP. THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INCOME ON SALE OF SHARES UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS AND ALSO CAPITAL GAINS. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS TAKEN THE PURCHASE PRICE OF HINDUSTAN ZINK WRONGLY AS SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 7 RS.9,35,864/ - , WHILE THE CORRECT PURCHASE COST WAS RS.21,89,439/ - . ALL THE SHARES CONSIDERED BY THE AO WERE SHARES OF REPUTED COMPANIES AND THEY DO NOT FALL UNDER THE CATEGORY OF PENNY STOCKS. 9. WE NOTICE THAT THE AO HAS MAINLY PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI. THE LD D.R ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO ACCEPTED TH AT HE HAS PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY CHARGING COMMISSION INCOME. THE LD A.R, ON THE CONTRARY, CONTENDED THAT THE STATEMENT SO GIVEN BY SHRI MUKESH CHO KSI IS A SELF SERVING STATEMENT AND IN ANY CASE, HIS STATEMENT IS TOTALLY AGAINST THE FACTS A VAILABLE ON RECORD. IT CANNOT BE DENIED THAT THE SHARES HAVE BEEN PHYSICALLY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, SINCE THEY HAVE ENTERED THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF SHARES IN THE HANDS OF THE A SSESSEE. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THOSE SHARES THROUGH ANOTHER BROKER NAMED M/S KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. THESE FACTS, IN OUR VIEW, PROVES THAT THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI MUKESH CHOKSI THAT HIS GROUP HAS PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES IS WRONG AN D AGAINST THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER SHE HAS PURCHASED THE SHARES BY MAKING PAYMENT THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS. IT WAS NOT DENIED THAT THE DEMAT ACCOUNT SHOWS THE TRANS ACTIONS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES. ALL THESE FACTS SHOW THAT THE VERY REASON, ON WHICH THE AO MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WOULD FAIL. THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE SUPPORT HER CLAIM. ACCORDINGLY WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 10. WE SHALL NOW TAKE UP THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 2008 - 09. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ADDED THE PURCHASE COST OF SHARES OF HINDUSTAN ZINC AND ALCHEMIST SHARES DURING THIS YEAR ALSO, WHILE THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THOSE SHARES IN THE PRECEDING YEAR. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ADDITION MADE IN THIS YEAR IS IDENTICAL WITH THE FACTS AVAILABLE IN AY 2007 - 08, I.E., THE REASONING GIVEN BY THE AO FOR MAKING THE ADDIT ION AND THE CONTENTIONS SMT. KALPANA M. RUIA 8 OF THE ASSESSEE ARE IDENTICAL. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) ALSO DELETED THE ADDITION ON IDENTICAL REASONING ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, FOLLOWING OUR DECISION RENDERED IN AY 2007 - 08, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) IN THIS YEAR. 11. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE E N PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16 . 1 1 .201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - (AMARJIT SINGH ) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 16 / 11 / 20 1 8 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI