ACIT, Circle-50, Kolkata, Kolkata V. Smt. Nilakhi Roy, Kolkata

ITA 415/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 78398 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAVID Z CHAWNGTHU CITSR
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH C , KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI P.K.BANSAL, AM & HONBLE SRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM] ITA NO.415/KOL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ( APPELLANT ) - (RESPONDENT) A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-50, SMT.NILAKHI ROY KOLKATA -VERSUS- KOLKATA (PAN : ACHPR 6621 H) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI DAVID Z.CHAWNGTHU, ADDL.CIT,SR.DR FOR THE RESPONDENT: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 25.07.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : ORDER PER SHRI P.K.BANSAL, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA DATED 26.12.2011 FOR A.YR.2006-07 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS :- 1. CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES AS WELL AS PAPERS LIKE COPY OF DEMAT ACCOUNT WITH EITHER NSDL OR CDSI, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT WITH DEBIT FOR P URCHASE AND CREDIT OF SALE, PROPER REFLECTION OF BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOU NT WERE NOT PRODUCED FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTED INCOME US 10(38) AND SOURCES OF INVESTMENT IN FLAT WAS NOT PROPERLY EXPLAINED. WHETHER ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISREGARDING ALL THOSE EVIDENCES BEFORE DELETING TH E ADDITIONS. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN TH OUGH NOTICE HAS BEEN DULY SENT TO HIM, IN THE EARLIER OCCASION ALSO WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES T O THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.13,41,434/- U/S 10(38) OF THE ACT W HICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE AO OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED DOCUME NTARY EVIDENCES REGARDING PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES. WHEN THE MATTER WENT B EFORE THE LD. CITA) THE LD. CIT(A) ITA NO.415/KOL/2012 SMT.NILAKHI ROY A.YR.2006-07 2 EXAMINED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE R ELEVANT EVIDENCES REGARDING THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE SHARES. EVEN THOUGH HE NOT ED THAT THE SHARES WERE SOLD DURING THE YEAR AND ULTIMATELY AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY T O THE AO FOR MAKING THE REMAND REPORT HE ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 10( 38) OF THE ACT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERE D THE SAME ALONG THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE NOTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A)AFTER APPRECIATING THE EVIDENCES IN RESPECT OF THE PURCHASE AND SALES OF T HE SHARES AND ALSO THE CONTRACT NOTES COPY OF WHICH WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO AF TER NOTING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID SECURITIES TRANSACTION TAX ON THE SALE OF THOSE SHA RES TOOK A VIEW THAT SHARES FOR MORE THAN 12 MONTHS IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(38) OF THE ACT. THE EVIDENCES EXAMINED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IN OUR OPINION, ARE SUF FICIENT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO PROVE THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE SHARES. WE DO NO T FIND THAT IT IS A FIT CASE WHERE OUR INTERFERENCE IS REQUIRED. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ST ANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25.07.2014. SD/- SD/- [GEORGE MATHAN ] [P.K.BANSAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 25.07.2014. R.G.(.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SMT.NILAKHI ROY, CA-242, SECTOR-I, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA-700064. 2 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-50, KOLKATA 3 . CIT KOLKATA 4 . CIT(A)- XXXII, KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES