RAJNISH JAIN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER
LAWS(ALL)-2017-12-69
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on December 01,2017

Rajnish Jain Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, New Delhi dated 19.06.2009 for the Assessment Year 1998-99 raising the following questions of law:- "(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct to confirm the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act against the appellant. (B) Whether the assessee have ignored the mode of purchase of 3500 shares of M/s KRS Financial Limited through M/s S.K. Garg and Company Delhi per contract note dated 05.04.1996 and Bill No. M-85 dated 15.04.1996 as well as the letter of K.R.S. Financial Limited dated 28.08.1996 regarding transfer of shares in the name of the appellant and also corresponding the contract note dated 30.05.1997 of Surinder Singh Mehta for sale of shares by Bill No. 272 dated 20.06.1997, the I.T.A.T. rightly held the sale of 3500 shares was bogus one. (C) Whether the ITAT rightly made addition of Rs. 6,06,069/- in hands of the appellant specially when the burden of purchase and sale of 3500 shares of M/s K.R.S. Financial was discharged bu the Department relying statement of M/s S.K. Garg and Company and M/s Surinder Singh Mehta which were not corroborated written any evidence. (D) Whether the ITAT was legally justified in affirming reassessment order passed by A.O. u/s 147/143(3) of the Act when there was no reason to believe nor any tangible material with A.O. to form opinion that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. (E) Whether the ITAT was legally justified in affirming reassessment order passed by A.O. u/s 147/143(3) of the Act ignoring the fact that A.O. framed assessment u/s 147 without carrying out any inquiry and without affording opportunity to assessee to cross examine the witness."
(2.) At the very outset Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the assessee stated he would be pressing questions of law namely A, D and E only. The assessee declared to have derived his income for the previous year relevant to Assessment Year 1998-99 from salary payment, interest and capital gains.
(3.) In respect of capital gains claimed by the assessee had disclosed purchase of 3,500 shares of M/s KRS Financial Ltd. @ Rs. 21 per share aggregating to Rs. 74,235/- from a broker M/s S.K. Garg & Company vide it's bill dated 15.04.1996. The shares were claimed to have transferred in the name of assessee on 13.06.1996. The said shares were then claimed to have been sold through another broker S.S. Mehta on 30.05.1997 @ Rs. 175 per share. While the assessee had disclosed the purchase of aforesaid shares through cash payment, it received the sale proceeds amounting to Rs. 6,06,069/-, through cheque.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.