PRAMOOD KUMAR LODHA, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 826/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6383 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SEEMA MEENA JCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHAN SOGANI CAS
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Share purchase agreement; Opportunity of cross examination; Fair market value; Corroborative evidences; Assessment record
• Section: 133(6); 131; 69; 2

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; ,O A JH HKKXPUN ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, A M VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11. SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, A-8, MAHAVIR NAGAR, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAFPL 0723 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJEEV SOGANI AND SHRI ROHAN SOGANI (CAS) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. SEEMA MEENA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 05.07.2018. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/07/2018. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 15 TH OCTOBER, 2014 OF LD. CIT (A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE LD. CIT (A) IS WRONG, UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN L AW IN CONFIRMING FINDING RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R THAT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 72,61,309/- ON SALE OF SH ARES IS NOT GENUINE ALLEGEDLY ON THE GROUND THAT PURCHASE OF TH OSE SHARES IS A SHAM TRANSACTION AND THEREBY CONFIRMING ADDITI ON TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 72,61,309/- TO THE INCOME OF THE APPE LLANT U/S 69 2 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNACCOU NTED CONSIDERATION IN PURCHASE OF THOSE SHARES. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE PERMISSION TO ADD OR TO AMEND TO ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR TO WITHDRAW A NY OF THEM. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, DERIVES INCOME FR OM HOUSE PROPERTY, REMUNERATION FROM PARTNERSHIP FIRM, CAPITAL GAIN FR OM SALE OF SHARES AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEV ANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF COMMODITY BROKING. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 2 ND OCTOBER, 2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 7,18,890/-. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(38) OF THE IT ACT IN RESPECT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 72, 61,309/- ARISING FROM SALE OF EQUITY SHARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS LTD. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO QUESTIONED THE ALLOWABILITY OF THE CLAIM AND RATHER DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM WHICH INC LUDED PURCHASE BILLS OF THE SHARES, CONFIRMATION OF THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE PURCHASED, D-MAT ACCOUNT STATEMENT SHOWING HOLDING OF SHARES AND SAL E OF SHARES FROM THE D-MAT ACCOUNT, SALE BILLS OF SHARES SOLD, COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THE BROKER THROUGH WHOM THE SHARES WERE SOLD AND COPY OF CONTRACT NOTE ISSUED B Y THE BROKER. THE AO ISSUED A COMMISSION UNDER SECTION 131(1)(D) OF THE IT ACT TO THE ITO INVESTIGATION, INDORE FOR ENQUIRY TO BE CONDUCTED IN RESPECT OF GENUINENE SS OF THE TRANSACTION. AS PER THE REPORT OF THE ITO INVESTIGATION, INDORE IT WAS FOUN D THAT M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & 3 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. SHARES, INDORE THROUGH WHOM THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED THE SHARES IN QUESTION DOES NOT EXIST ON THE GIVEN ADDRESS. THE AO ISSUED SUMM ON UNDER SECTION 131 TO ONE SHRI SATYA NARAIN RATHI WHICH WAS SERVED BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. THE AO ALSO ISSUED A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) TO M/S. A RIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES FOR CONFIRMATION OF SALE OF SHARES TO THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE, CONFIRMATION WAS FILED BY M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES. THE AO DID NO T ACCEPT THE CONFIRMATION AND CONDUCTED FURTHER ENQUIRY FROM THE GROUP COMPANY OF M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES, NAMELY, M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. A ND STATEMENT OF ONE SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI WAS RECORDED WHO HAD DENIED HAVING ANY TRA NSACTION WITH THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE SHARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CO NTAINERS LTD. ACCORDINGLY, HE DENIED THE CLAIM OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND EXEM PTION UNDER SECTION 10(38) OF THE IT ACT AND MADE THE ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION O F THE AO BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. CIT (A) UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO BY TREATING THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS BOGUS TRANSACTION. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT (A ) HAS ALLOWED THE RELIEF ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE CONSIDERATION OF SHARES ALREADY RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED ALL THE RELEVANT RECORD AND EVIDENCES IN S UPPORT OF THE CLAIM AND ENTIRE TRAIL OF DOCUMENTS SUBSTANTIATING THE TRANSACTION O F PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES, BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ONLY REQUIREMENT FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(38) IS THE TRANSACTION OF SALE UNDERTAKE N AND SUBJECTED TO STT IN RESPECT OF SHARES OF A COMPANY LISTED IN THE RECOGNIZED STO CK EXCHANGE. THE LD. A/R HAS 4 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE COM PANY M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS LTD. WAS LISTED IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE AN D THOUGH THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED THE SHARES THROUGH OFF MARKET TRANSACTION BUT THE S HARES WERE DEMATERIALIZED BEFORE THE SAME WERE SOLD AFTER ONE YEAR FROM THE D-MAT AC COUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE LD. A/R HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PRO DUCED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND EVIDENCES ESTABLISHING THE PURCHASE OF SHARES, DEMATERIALIZATION OF THE SAME AND THEREAFTER SALE OF SHARES FROM D-MAT ACCOUNT AG AINST THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THE AO AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT DISPUTED THE SALE OF SHARES AND RECEIPT OF CONSIDERATION BUT HAV E TREATED THE TRANSACTION OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECT ION 10(38) AS BOGUS. THE LD. A/R HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PUR CHASED THE SHARES IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2008 AND WERE DULY RECORDED IN THE BOO KS OF ACCOUNT AND SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2009. THEREFORE, THE SHARES WHICH WERE ALREADY RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2009 CANNOT BE TREATED AS BOGUS TRANSACTION ONLY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE EARNED A HUGE CAPITAL GAIN DUE TO THE ABNORMAL INCREASE IN THE MARKET PRICE OF THE SHARES. HE HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE AO HAS RELIED UPON THE STATEMENT OF SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI OF M/S. ARIHANT C APITAL MARKET LTD. HOWEVER, THE SAID PERSON WAS NOT IN THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE COMPAN Y WHEN THE TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTA INERS TOOK PLACE IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2008. THE AO HIMSELF HAS ACCEPTED THIS FA CT THAT SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI IS IN EMPLOYMENT OF M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKET LTD. O NLY FOR FOUR YEARS WHEN THE STATEMENT WAS RECORDED IN THE MONTH OF MARCH, 2013, WHEREAS THE TRANSACTION OF 5 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. PURCHASE OF SHARES TOOK PLACE PRIOR TO THE FOUR YEA RS IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2008. FURTHER, MERE DENIAL OF HAVING TRANSACTION IS NOT SUFFICIENT WHEN THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED ALL THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. TH US THE LD. A/R HAS CONTENDED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY EVIDENCE TO PRO VE THE TRANSACTION TO BE BOGUS, THE DENIAL OF CLAIM BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF SUSPI CION AND DOUBT IS NOT PROPER AND JUSTIFIED. HE HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE AO EVEN NOT PROVIDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO CROSS EXAMINE THE INSPECTOR WHO HAS CONDUCTED THE ENQUIRY OR SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI WHOSE STATEMENT WAS RECORDED B Y THE AO AT THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) TO ONE SHRI SATYANARAIN RATHI BUT HE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO AND NON APPEARA NCE OF THE SAID PERSON CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR CONSIDERING THE TRANSACTION TO BE BO GUS. THE AO DID NOT TAKE ANY FURTHER STEP FOR ENSURING THE PRESENCE OF SHRI SATY ANARAIN RATHI THOUGH A CONFIRMATION WAS FILED ADMITTING THE TRANSACTION OF SALE OF SHARES TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2008. THUS THE TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES WAS VERY MUCH PROVED BY THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCES, W HICH WAS NOT DISPUTED BY THE AO. THE LD. A/R HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUNITA DHADDA, 403 ITR 183 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS UPHELD THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTI ONAL HIGH COURT WHEREIN THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF ON MONEY WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND HAVE UPHELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT WAS FOUND TO BE PROPER AND JUSTIFIED AS THE AO MADE SUCH AN ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEM ENT OF A WITNESS WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS EXAMINATION TO THE ASSESSEE . THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBU NAL DATED 31.01.2018 IN THE CASE 6 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. OF SHRI PRAMOD JAIN & OTHERS IN ITA NOS. 368 TO 372 /JP/2017 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT IT IS NOT EXPECTED FROM THE ASSESSEE INDIVIDUAL TO PRODUCE THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS OF THE ASSESSEE RATHER THE AO OU GHT TO HAVE SUMMONED THEM IF THE EXAMINATION OF OFFICERS WERE CONSIDERED NECESSA RY BY THE AO. THE AO OUGHT NOT TO HAVE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS OF THOSE COMPANIES. THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HO NBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRINCIPAL CIT VS. SHUBH MINES PVT. LTD. DATED 3 RD MAY, 2016 IN DBIT APPEAL NO. 96 OF 2015 AND SUBMITTED THAT HONBLE HI GH COURT HAS HELD THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF COGENT EVIDENCE ON RECORD ESTABLISHING T HAT MONEY SHOWN TO HAVE RECEIVED AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS, AS A MATTE R OF FACT, UNACCOUNTED MONEY BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE, THE FINDING OF THE AO BA SED ON SUSPICION HAS RIGHTLY BEEN HELD NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. HE HAS T HEN REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ( SPECIAL BENCH) IN TH E CASE OF GTC INDUSTRIES VS. ACIT, 164 ITD 1 AND SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS HELD THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IF NO DIRECT EVIDENCE HAS BEE N BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE INTRODUCED HIS OWN UNACCOUNT ED MONEY BY WAY OF BOGUS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. HE HAS ALSO RELIED UPON FOLLOWI NG DECISIONS :- PRINCIPAL CIT VS. PREM LAL GANDHI 94 TAXMANN.COM 156 (P&H) PRINCIPAL CIT VS. SHRI HITESH GANDH ITA NO. 18 OF 2017 (P&H) CIT VS. SMT. POOJA AGARWAL, DBIT APPEAL NO. 385/2011 (RAJ.HC) CIT VS. CARBO INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LTD. 116 TAXMAN 159 (CAL.) 7 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. CIT VS. EMERALD COMMERCIAL LTD. 120 TAXMAN 282 (CAL.) HENCE, THE LD. A/R HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE ABSENC E OF ANY FINDING BY THE INVESTIGATION WING HOLDING THE TRANSACTION AS BOGUS AND ASSESSEE BEING PART OF ANY RACKET OF THE ENTRY PROVIDERS, DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS UNJUSTIFIED. THE AO HAS NOT REBUTTED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER AO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT OF WITNESS, REP ORT OF THE ITO INVESTIGATION, INDORE WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS EXAMI NATION TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. 3.1. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED THE GENUINENESS OF THE PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES AND THE BILLS FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES MENTIONED ONLY CASH PAYMENT AND NOT THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE WHICH CAN BE VERIFIED INDEPENDENTLY, THE SAID BILL PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ACCEPT ED. THE AO HAS CONDUCTED THE DUE ENQUIRY TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSA CTION. AS PER THE REPORT OF THE ITO INVESTIGATION, INDORE, THE SHARE BROKER WAS NOT FOUND AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS AND, THEREFORE, WHEN THERE WAS NO EXISTENCE OF THE SHARE BROKER THEN THE DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE AS ISSUED BY THE ALLEGE D SHARE BROKER CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS GENUINE EVIDENCE. THE LD. D/R HAS FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ALSO RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI , THE AUTHORIZED PERSON OF M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKET LTD. THE CONFIRMATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CLEARLY MENTIONS THAT M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES IS AN UNIT OF M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKETS LTD., THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE SHARE BROKER, THE AO CONDUCTED THE ENQUIRY FROM 8 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. THE PARENT COMPANY M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKETS LTD . THROUGH ITO INVESTIGATION, INDORE WHO HAD DENIED HAVING ANY TRANSACTION OF SAL E OF SHARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS LTD. TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D/R HAS THUS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS BROUGHT ON RECORD EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF E NQUIRY AND STATEMENTS TO HOLD THAT THE TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES IS BOGUS, IN THE NATURE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY TO CLAIM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WHICH IS EXEMPT FROM TAX. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO GIVEN THE INSPECTORS REPORT AS W ELL AS THE STATEMENT OF SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI WHICH WAS DULY RESPONDED BY THE ASS ESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY AND CONFRONTED WITH THE REPORT OF THE INSPECTOR INVESTIGATION, INDORE A S WELL AS THE STATEMENT OF SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI. THE LD. D/R HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AS IN THOSE CASES THE TRANSACTIONS WERE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL WHERE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE PAID THE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION IN CASH. SHE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE DETAILS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES IN QUESTION ARE GIVEN BY THE AO IN PARA 3.1 PAGE 10 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDE R :- SALE OF SHARES (NOV & DEC, 09) RS.7408697/- QUANTITY RATES TRANSACTION DATE SD ON DEL + STT + SERVICE TAX + TURNOVER TAX TOTAL 923 RS.327.18 NOV, 26 991.06 561559 797 RS.326.93 NOV, 26 4780 RS.311.22 DEC, 02 2620 1485010 2000 RS.309.42 DEC, 04 9 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. 500 RS.308.63 DEC, 04 1362.12 771792 5000 RS.318.20 DEC, 15 9000 RS.334.16 DEC, 15 8104 4590335 7408696 LESS COST/PURCHASE OF 2300 SHARES @ RS.6.37 PER SHA RE FOR RS. 147839/- (SOLD ON 4.11.2008) INCLUDING STT AND BROKERAGE OF RS. 879/- FROM M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES, INDORE LTCG RS. 7261309/- THUS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED 2300 S HARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS LTD. @ RS. 6.37 PER SHARE. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE COPY OF PURCHASE BILL DATED 4 TH NOVEMBER, 2008 ISSUED BY M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES. THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES WAS PAID AT RS . 1,47,839/- WHICH INCLUDED BROKERAGE, STT ETC. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PRODUCED THE LEDGER ACCOUNT SHOWING THE TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE AND PAYMENT TO M/S. ARIHANT SECURITIES & SHARES LTD. THEREAFTER THE SHARES WERE DEMATERIALIZED AND ASSES SEE PRODUCED THE D-MAT ACCOUNT REFLECTING THE BALANCE OF SECURITIES OF VAR IOUS COMPANIES INCLUDING 2300 SHARES OF M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS. WE F IND THAT THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES BY THE A SSESSEE BUT THERE ARE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS IN THE D-MAT SHARES OF DIFFERENT COMPA NIES THROUGH IPO AS WELL AS OTHER TRANSACTIONS. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THIS COMPANY M/S. WELL PACK PAPERS & CONTAINERS LTD. WAS LISTED IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE AN D THE AO HAS NOT DISPUTED THE PREVAILING MARKET PRICE OF THESE SHARES AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE AS WELL AS AT THE TIME OF SALE. THOUGH THERE IS AN INCREASE OF MANY FOLD I N THE MARKET PRICE OF THE SHARES AT THE TIME OF SALE IN COMPARISON TO THE PURCHASE, HOW EVER, THE SAID PRICE WAS NOT DISPUTED AS THE PREVAILING MARKET PRICE AT THE RELE VANT POINT OF TIME. SINCE THIS 10 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. COMPANY WAS LISTED IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE, THEREFORE , THERE WAS NO HURDLE IN ASCERTAINING THE PREVAILING MARKET PRICE OF THE SHA RES AT THE POINT OF PURCHASE AS WELL AS SALE. SINCE THE MARKET PRICE AND THE PRICE AT WHICH THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED THE SHARES AND SUBSEQUENTLY SOLD ARE NOT IN DISPUTE , THEN MERELY BECAUSE THERE IS HUGE CAPITAL GAIN EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE TRA NSACTION CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR HOLDING THE SAME AS BOGUS TRANSACTION. THOUGH THE I NCREASE IN THE MARKET PRICE OF THE SHARES IS ABNORMAL AND MANY FOLD, HOWEVER, THE SAME CAN BE ONLY A REASON TO CONDUCT THE ENQUIRY TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF TH E CLAIM BUT CANNOT BE A BASIS OF HOLDING THE TRANSACTION AS BOGUS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECORDED THE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE OF SHARES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AS PER THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2009 THESE SHARES HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE IN VESTMENT SCHEDULE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2009 HAS BEEN ANNEXED BY THE AO TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND, THEREFORE, IT IS PART OF THE ASSESSMENT RECORD WHICH SHOWS THE SHARES SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 3 1 ST MARCH, 2009. THE FACTS OF SHOWING THESE SHARES IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE AS SESSEE FOR THE PRECEDING YEAR AND SALE OF THESE SHARES IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER, 2009 IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE AS THE AO AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ACCEPTED THIS FACT. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ALLOWED TH E PURCHASE CONSIDERATION PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WHICH SHOWS THAT THE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION WAS ACCEPTED BY THE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. CIT (A) IN PARA 4.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS ACCEPTED THIS FACT THAT THE AO H AS NOT DISPUTED THE SALE TRANSACTION PERTAINING TO THE ABOVE SHARES AND ONLY THE PURCHASE OF SHARES IS THE 11 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. TAINTED TRANSACTION. PARA 4.2 AND 4.2(E) OF THE LD . CIT (APPEALS) ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 4.2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT DISPUTED THE S ALE TRANSACTION PERTAINING TO THE ABOVE SHARES. IT IS WITH RESPECT TO THE PURCHASE OF SHARES THAT THE FOLLOWING FACTS MERIT CONSIDERATION . (A) XXXXXXXX (B) XXXXXXXX (C) XXXXXXXX (D) XXXXXXXX (E) THE SHARES HAVE BEEN CREDITED IN THE DEMAT ACCO UNT OF THE APPELLANT ONLY A FEW DAYS BEFORE THE SALE OF SHARES THROUGH THE STOCK EXCHANGE. THUS THE SALES OF THE SHARES ARE NOT IN DISP UTE AS THE SAME WERE SOLD FROM THE D-MAT ACCOUNT AGAINST THE CONSIDERATION WHICH WAS R ECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THE DEMATERIALIZATION OF THE SHARES IN THE D-MAT ACCOUNT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE HENCE THE HOLDING OF THE SHA RES IN THE D-MAT ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE PRIOR TO THE SALE AS WELL AS THE SALE TRAN SACTION ARE NOT IN DISPUTE. ONCE HOLDING OF THE SHARES PRIOR TO THE SALE AND THE SAL E TRANSACTION ITSELF ARE NOT IN DISPUTE THEN THE SAME CANNOT BE HELD AS BOGUS TRANS ACTION THOUGH MAY BE A CASE OF INTRODUCING UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEPRESSING THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE SHARES. HOWEVER, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATE RIAL OR THE FACT TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INTRODUCED HIS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY I N THE NAME OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN, THE MERE SUSPICION IS NOT ENOUGH TO D ENY THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 12 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F PRAMOD JAIN VS. DCIT (SUPRA) HAS DEALT WITH AN IDENTICAL ISSUE IN PARA 6 & 7 AS UNDER :- 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE PURCHASES 800 EQU ITY SHARES M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 4 LA CS THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED THE PURCHASE BILL OF THE SHARES PURCHASE F ROM M/S WINALL VINIMAY PVT. LTD. WHICH SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE PUR CHASE 800 EQUITY SHARES HAVING FACE VALUE OF RS. 10/- EACH M/S GRAVI TY BARTER PVT. LTD. IN ALLOTS OF 400 EACH FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 2 LACS EACH TOTAL AMOUNT TO RS. 4 LACS @ RS. 500 PER SHARES. THE PURCHASE PR ICE OF RS. 500 PER SHARE ITSELF SHOWS THAT IT WAS NOT A TRANSACTION OF PURCHASE OF PENNY STOCK. THESE SHARES WERE DULY REFLECTED IN THE BALA NCE SHEET AS 31.03.2011. THE PAYMENT OF THE PURCHASE CONSIDERATI ON WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE CHEQUE ON 17.05.2011 WHICH IS EVI DENT FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AT PAGE 40 OF THE PAP ER BOOK. IN THE MEAN TIME THE SAID M/S GRAVITY BARTER PVT. LTD. CHA NGED ITS STATUS FROM PRIVATE LIMITED TO A PUBLIC LIMITED AND FRESH CERTI FICATE WAS ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANY ON 05.02.2011 WHICH IS PLA CED AT PAGE 43 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON TO DI SBELIEF THE FACT OF FRESH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF COMPAN IES ON 05.02.2011 AND HENCE, THE DATE MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OF THE H ONBLE KOLKATA HIGH COURT AS 18.04.2011 APPEARS TO BE TYPOGRAPHICA L MISTAKE. EVEN OTHERWISE THESE TWO DATES DO NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE OF EQUITY SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE THOUGH PRODUC ED ALL THE RELEVANT RECORDS AND EVIDENCES RIGHT FROM THE PURCHASE BILLS , CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR ABOUT THE CHANGE OF NAME, THE COMM UNICATION BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE SELLER OF THE SHARES A ND THEREAFTER, THE AMALGAMATION OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. WITH M/S OA SIS CINE 13 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. COMMUNICATION LTD. WHICH WAS DULY APPROVED BY THE H ONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 28.8.2011. THE ASSESSEE IN T HE MEAN TIME GOT THE PHYSICAL SHARE CERTIFICATE DEMATERIALIZED INTO DEMAT ACCOUNT ON 16.02.2012. THERE IS NO REASON TO DOUBT THE ALLOTME NT OF THE SHARES TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER AMALGAMATION TOOK PLACE BETWEEN M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. AND M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. A ND SUBSEQUENT TO AMALGAMATION THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOTTED SHARES OF M/ S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. ON 04.02.2012. HENCE, THE ALLOTM ENT OF 35,200 EQUITY SHARES OF M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. CANNOT BE DOUBTED OR DISPUTED AS THESE SHARES WERE ISSUED POST AMALGA MATION AND BY A LISTED COMPANY. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THES E SHARES OF M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. WERE ISSUED IN EXCHANGE OF THE SHARES HELD BY THE ASSESSEE OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. THEREFOR E, ONCE THE SHARES ISSUED BY M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. CANNOT BE DOUBTED THEN THE HOLDING OF THE SHARES OF THE M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. BY THE ASSESSEE CORRESPONDINGLY CANNOT BE DOUBTED BECAUSE OF THE RE ASONS THAT THE SHARES OF M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. COULD B E ALLOTTED ONLY IN EXCHANGE OF SHARES OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. THE H OLDING THE SHARES OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. AND THE ALLOTMENT OF SHA RES M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. ARE DIRECTLY INTERCONNECTED. IN THE ABSENCE OF HOLDING OF SHARES M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. THE SHARE S OF THE M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. COULD NOT BE ISSUED OR ALLO TTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HOLDING OF THE SHARES BY THE A SSESSEE AT LEAST AT TIME OF AMALGAMATION TOOK PLACE AND SHARES OF THE M /S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. ON 04.02.2012 CANNOT BE DOUBTED. MOREOVER, THESE SHARES WERE DEMATERIALIZED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE DEMAT ACCOUNT, THEREFORE, ON THE DATE OF ALLOTMENT OF SHA RE OF M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD THE ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING THESE S HARES AND PRIOR TO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING THE SHARES OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. ON EXCHANGE OF THE SAME THE SHARES OF M/S OASIS CI NE COMMUNICATION LTD. WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS DOUBTED 14 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS HOWEVER, ONCE T HE HOLDING OF SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF THE SAME WERE ISSUED BY M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. IS NOT IN DISPUTE THE N THE HOLDING OF SHARES OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. ALSO CANNOT BE DI SPUTE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WITHOUT HOLDING OF THE SAME THE SHARES OF M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. COULD NOT BE ISSUED TO THE ASSES SEE. ONCE, THE SHARES WERE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE THEN, THE QUESTION OF GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION DOES NOT ARISE HOWEVER, THE PURCHAS E CONSIDERATION CAN BE DOUBTED BY THE AO IF THE SHARES WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED AGAINST CONSIDERATION PAID IN CASH WHICH IS NOT IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID PURCHASE CONSID ERATION THROUGH CHEQUE AND THEREFORE, EVEN IF THE SAID CONSIDERATIO N IS FOUND TO BE VERY LESS IN COMPARISON TO THE SALE PRICE AT THE TI ME OF SALE OF SHARES IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL OR OTHER FACTS DETECTED OR BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT BACK HIS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN THE SHAPE OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND HAS USED THE SAME AS A DEVICE TO AVOID TAX, THE PURCHAS E CONSIDERATION PAID BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DOUBTED IN THE ABSEN CE OF ANY CORROBORATING EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS N OT DISPUTED THAT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE SHARES OF M/S GRAVITY BARTER LTD. WAS MORE THAN THE PURCHASE PRICE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSE E. IT MAY BE A CASE THAT ENSURING MERGER/AMALGAMATION OF THE SAID COMPANY WITH M/S OASIS CINE COMMUNICATION LTD. THE ASSESSEE MIGHT HA VE ANTICIPANT THE EXCEPTIONAL APPRECIATION IN THE SHARE PRICE DUE TO EXTRAORDINARY EVENT OF MERGER/ AMALGAMATION. HOWEVER, THE SAME CANNOT B E A REASON FOR DOUBTING GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IF THE MOTI VE OF PURCHASE OF THE SHARE IS TO EARN AN EXTRAORDINARY GAIN BECAUSE OF SOME INTERNAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN CASE OF EQUITY SHARES M/S PARIDHI PROPERTIES LTD. THE ASSESSEE PURCHASE 50,000 EQUITY SHARE ON 26.03.2011 BY PAYING SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS. 5 LACS WHICH IS DULY REFLE CTED IN THE BANK 15 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS PAID ON 28.03.2011. THER EFORE, THE PAYMENT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY HAS BEEN DULY ES TABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH HIS BANK ACCOUNT FOR ALLOTMENT OF SHARES OF 50,000 EQUITY SHARES OF M/S PARIDHI PROPERTIES LTD. THE SH ARE ALLOTTED IN PRIVATE PLACEMENT AS PER OF RS. 10/- CANNOT BE TERM ED AS PENNY STOCK. THE AO DOUBTED THAT THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF APPLICATI ON AND ALLOTMENT OF SHARES AS IT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED WITHIN A SHORT DUR ATION OF 5 DAYS, WHICH IN THE OPINION OF THE AO IS NOT POSSIBLE IN O RDINARY COURSE. HOWEVER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED THE RECORD INCLUDING THE SHARE APPLICATION, PAYMENT OF SHARE APPLICATION MON EY, ALLOTMENT OF SHARE THEN MERELY BECAUSE OF A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME WILL NOT BE A SUFFICIENT REASON TO HOLD THAT THE TRANSACTION IS B OGUS. THE SHARES ALLOTTED TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE SHARE CERTIFICATE DAT ED 31.03.2011 WERE DEMATERIALIZED ON 21.10.2011, THEREFORE, ON THE DAT E OF DEMATERIALIZATION OF THE SHARES THE HOLDING OF THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DOUBTED AND HENCE THE ACQUISITIO N OF THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TREATED AS A BOGUS TRANSACTI ON. NOBODY CAN HAVE THE SHARES IN HIS OWN NAME IN DEMANT ACCOUNT W ITHOUT ACQUIRING OR ALLOTMENT THROUGH DUE PROCESS HENCE, EXCEPT THE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION PAID BY THE ASSESSEE HOLDING OF SHARE S CANNOT BE DOUBTED WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED ALL THE RELE VANT RECORD OF ISSUING OF ALLOTMENT OF SHARES, PAYMENT OF SHARE AP PLICATION MONEY THROUGH BANK, SHARE CERTIFICATE AND DEMAT ACCOUNT S HOWING THE SHARES CREDITED IN THE DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ON DE MATERIALIZATION. THE SAID COMPANY M/S PARIDHI PROPERTIES LTD. WAS SU BSEQUENTLY MERGED WITH M/S LUMINAIRE TECHNOLOGIES LTD. VIDE S CHEME APPROVED BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ORDER DATED 27.07. 2012. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE GOT ALLOTTED THE EQUITY SHARES OF M/S LUMI NAIRE TECHNOLOGIES LTD. AS PER SWAP RATIO APPROVED IN THE SCHEME AND C ONSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOTTED 5 LACS SHARE OF RS. 1/- EACH ON M/S LUMINAIRE 16 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. TECHNOLOGIES LTD. THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSE SSEE LEAVE NO SCOPE OF ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE HOLDING OF THE SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE DECISION OF THE AO HOLDING THE TRANSACTION AS BOGUS AND DENYING THE CLAIM OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN UNDER S ECTION 10(38) OF THE ACT IS BASED ON SUSPICION WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL EVIDENCE TO CONTR OVERT OR DISPROVE THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ENQUIRY CONDUCTED BY THE ITO INVESTIGATION INDORE IS NOT A CONCLUSIVE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE TRANSA CTION OF PURCHASE OF SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE IS BOGUS PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF ADMITTED FACT THAT THESE SHARES WERE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE AND WERE DULY MATERIALIZED IN THE D -MAT ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, UNTIL AND UNLESS A FINDING IS GIVEN THAT THE SHARES WERE ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE PERSON OTHER THAN THE BROKER CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSE E, THE MERE SUSPICION HOW SO EVER STRONG MAY BE, CANNOT BE A BASIS OF ADDITION O R DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM. AS REGARDS THE STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE ITO INVESTIGA TION INDORE OF ONE SHRI MAHESH PANCHOLI, IT IS RECORDED BY THE AO THAT THE SAID PE RSON WAS IN THE EMPLOYMENT ONLY FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS AND FURTHER THE SAID WITNES S HAS NOT DENIED THE CONFIRMATION ISSUED BY THE BROKER, BUT HAS GIVEN A VAGUE STATEME NT OF HAVING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF SUCH TRANSACTION OF SHARES SOLD TO THE ASSESSEE. E VEN OTHERWISE, THESE ENQUIRIES WERE CONDUCTED AT INDORE AND THE STATEMENT WAS RECO RDED AT THE SAME PLACE AND RATHER AT THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, UNTI L AND UNLESS THESE WITNESSES WERE PRESENT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSE SSEE WAS DENIED THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS EXAMINATION. MERELY SUPPLYING OF STATEMENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE FAG END OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IS NOT SU FFICIENT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE THE WITNE SS WHEN THE WITNESS HIMSELF WAS 17 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. NOT AVAILABLE AT THE PLACE. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW O F THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE AND FOLLOWING THE EARLIER DECISI ON OF THIS TRIBUNAL AS WELL AS VARIOUS DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE, WE H OLD THAT THE DENIAL OF THE CLAIM ON THE BASIS OF SUSPICION WITHOUT ANY COGENT MATERI AL TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT BACK HIS OWN UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE SHAP E OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN, THE SAID ACTION OF THE AO IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. ACCOR DINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW QUA THIS ISSUE AND DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON THIS ACCOUNT. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/07/2018. SD/- SD/- HKKXPUN FOT; IKY JKWO (BHAGCHAND) ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 16/07/2018. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT-SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 826/JP/2014} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR 18 ITA NO. 826/JP/2014 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR LODHA, JAIPUR.