ITO, Ward - 48(4), Kolkata , Kolkata V. Sri Sunil Yadav , Howrah

MA 307/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4878 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAUL
• Assessee Lawyers: MIRAJ D SHAH AR M A NO KOL AO
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Capital Gains
• Section: 254(2); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH KOLKATA [BEFORE SRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] M.A NO.307/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.1724/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-48(4), KOLKATA VS. SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH 27, SANATAN MISTRY LANE, SALKIA, P.S. GOLABARI, HOWRAH-711106 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ACAPY 3106 H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.278/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.2589/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) ITO, WARD-36(1), KOLKATA VS. RAJESH KUMAR SARDA, HUF, KOLKATA 412, MUKTI CHAMBERS, 4 CLIVE ROW, KOLKATA-700001 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AAHHR 1009 R (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.313/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.2428/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-45(1), KOLKATA VS. RAVI KUMAR DAGA 3A, MULLICK STREET, KOLKATA-700 007 M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 2 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ADJPD 9755 D (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.312/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.2209/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-45(1), KOLKATA VS. KAMLESH AGARWAL FLAT NO.L 4K, BLOCK-4, WINDSOR CASTLE, 74/1, NARKELDANGA MAIN ROAD, KOLKATA-54 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ACUPA4957C (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUBASH AGARWAL, AR M.A NO.306/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.1723/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-48(4), KOLKATA VS. SMT. PREETI YADAV 27, SANAATAN MISTRY LANE, SALKIA, P.S. GOLABARI, HOWRAH-711106 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AEMPY 8416 N (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.281/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.166/KOL/2019) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 3 ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA VS. JAI PRAKASH GUPTA ROOM NO.18, 1 ST FLOOR, KRISHNA SADAN, 26, P.K. TAGORE STREET, JORABGAN, KOLKATA 06. ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AGJPG5316J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. M. ROY, FCA & S.N. KHEMKA M.A NO.280/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.288/KOL/2019) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-37(3), KOLKATA VS. VINITA AGRAWAL LEVEL-3, CENTRAL PLAZA, C- 11, 41, B.B. GANGULY STREET, KOLKATA-700 012 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ACGPA 1872 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD KR. AGARWAL, CA M.A NO.308/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.1738/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-48(4), KOLKATA VS. S.N. LAHOTI & SONS (HUF) 171, RAMKRISHNA LANE, SHIBPUR, HOWRAH-711102 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AAQHS 0122R (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : NONE M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 4 M.A NO.311/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.2429/KOL/2019) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-45(1), KOLKATA VS. RAVI KUMAR DAGA [HUF] 3A, MULLICK STREET, KOLKATA-700 007 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AAGHR 2721 H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.315/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.2074/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-46(3), KOLKATA VS. SHRI GAURAV CHOPRA 88, BLOCK-G, 4TH FLOOR, RABINDRA NAGAR COMPLEX, COLLEGE ROAD, HOWRAH 711103 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AITPC 1161 H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, AR M.A NO.314/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.1655/KOL/2018) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-48(4), KOLKATA VS. SATISH MADHOGARIA (HUF) C/O S.L. KOCHAR, ADVOCATE, 5, ASHUTOSH CHOWDHURY AVENUE, KOLKATA-19 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AARHS 9965 F (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 5 APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : NONE M.A NO.279/KOL/2019 (A/O I.T.A NO.227/KOL/2019) ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITO, WARD-37(4), KOLKATA VS. M/S VINOD KR. AGARWAL, KOLKATA LEVEL-3, CENTRAL PLAZA, C- 11, 41, B.B GANGULY STREET, KOLKATA-700012 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: ACQPA 9912 R (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD KR. AGARWAL, CA / DATE OF HEARING : 14/02/2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19/02/2020 / O R D E R PER SHRI S. S. GODARA: THE REVENUES INSTANT TWELVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT SEEK TO RECALL TRIBUNALS ORDER(S) REVERSING BOTH THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION ADDING LONG/SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS/LOSSES AS BOGUS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS U/S 68 SINCE INVOLVING ALLEGED ARTIFICIAL RIGGING OF THE CORRESPONDING SCRIP PRICES IN COLLUSION WITH ENTRY OPERATORS CONCERNED. 2. I HAVE HEARD SHRI PAUL, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND THE ASSESSEE(S) THROUGH THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE(S). MR. PAUL VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS COMMITTED AN APPARENT ERROR ON RECORD WHILST DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION(S) IN THESE CASES. IT IS M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 6 EMPHASISED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) HAD FOUND THESE ASSESSEES TO HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN ARTIFICIAL RIGGING OF SCRIP(S) PRICES IN COLLUSION WITH ENTRY OPERATORS RESULTING IN THE ALLEGED BOGUS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS ADDITION(S). IT IS LASTLY SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNALS HAS ALSO NOT DISTINGUISHED THE ISSUES INVOLVED I.E LONG-TERM AND SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS/LOSSES. 3. I HAVE GIVEN MY THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE REVENUES THREE FOLDED PLEADINGS. SUFFICE TO SAY, I MAKE IT CLEAR THAT SECTION 254(2) IS A REMEDY FOR MODIFICATION/RECTIFICATION IN CASE THERE IS AN APPARENT ERROR ON RECORD. I NOTICE THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS ON RECORD IN LIGHT OF VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS WHILST COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL THAN ACTUAL EVIDENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF TREATING THE LONG/SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS/LOSSES, IS NOT LIABLE TO BE SUSTAINED. THE SAME CANNOT BE TERMED AS AN APPARENT ERROR ON RECORD WHICH COULD FORM SUBJECT MATTER OF SECTION 254(2) PROCEEDINGS. 5. NEXT COMES THE REVENUES LATTER PLEA(S) THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT DISTINGUISHED THE FACTUM OF THE ISSUE(S) INVOLVED I.E. LONG-TERM & SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS/LOSSES BASED ON ENTRY OPERATORS COLLUSION WITH ASSESSEES. I FIND NO FORCE IN THESE ARGUMENTS AS WELL SINCE THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FOLLOWED THE VERY REASONING IN THESE ASPECTS CAPITAL GAINS WITHOUT QUOTING ANY SPECIFIC MATERIAL AGAINST THESE ASSESSEES. AND ALSO THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAD GONE BY IDENTICAL REASONING OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AS PER CASE LAW SUMATI DAYAL V. CIT 214 ITR 801(SC) AND CIT V. DURGA PRASAD MORE 82 ITR 540(SC) AND NOT ACTUAL EVIDENCE. THIS TRIBUNAL HAS HELD, IN NUTSHELL, THAT SUCH A COURSE OF ACTION OF TREATING ALL CATEGORIES OF GAINS OR LOSSES; AS THE CASE MAY BE, MUST BE BASED AS ACTUAL EVIDENCE ONLY. THE SAME REASONING APPLIES MUTATIS MUTANDIS IN ALL THESE CASES THEREFORE. M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 7 6. THE REVENUES TWELVE INSTANT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FAIL THEREFORE. A COPY OF THIS INSTANT COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN THE RESPECTIVE CASE FILE(S). I MAKE IT CLEAR BEFORE CONCLUDING THAT SINCE THE REVENUES INSTANT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS INVOLVE IDENTICAL GRIEVANCES, THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF THE FOREGOING COMMON ADJUDICATION. 8. THESE REVENUES TWELVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.02.2020. SD/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER /KOLKATA; / DATE: 19/02/2020 RS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT - (I) ITO, WARD-48(4), KOLKATA (II) ITO, WARD-36(1), KOLKATA (III) ITO, WARD-45(1), KOLKATA (IV) ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA (V) ITO, WARD-37(3), KOLKATA (VI) ITO, WARD-46(3), KOLKATA (VII) ITO, WARD-37(4), KOLKATA 2. THE RESPONDENT- (I) SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH (II) RAJESH KUMAR SARDA, HUF, KOLKATA (III) RAVI KUMAR DAGA (IV) KAMLESH AGARWAL (V) SMT. PREETI YADAV (VI) JAI PRAKASH GUPTA (VII) VINITA AGRAWAL (VIII) S.N. LAHOTI & SONS (HUF) M.A NO.307,278,313,312,306,281,280,308,311,315,314,279/KOL/2019 SRI SUNIL YADAV, HOWRAH & ORS . PAGE | 8 TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA . (IX) RAVI KUMAR DAGA [HUF] (X) SHRI GAURAV CHOPRA (XI) SATISH MADHOGARIA (HUF) (XII) M/S VINOD KR. AGARWAL, KOLKATA 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), KOLKATA [SENT THROUGH EMAIL] 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA [SENT THROUGH EMAIL] 6. [ / GUARD FILE.