| COURT: | ITAT Kolkata |
| CORAM: | A. T. Varkey (JM), Dr. A. L. Saini (AM) |
| SECTION(S): | 10(38), 50C |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | bogus capital gains, Penny Stocks, stamp duty valuation |
| COUNSEL: | Manoj Kataruka |
| DATE: | August 9, 2019 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | August 17, 2019 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2014-15 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 50C + S. 10(38) Bogus Penny Stocks Capital Gains: (i) Though the 3rd Proviso to s. 50C, which provides a safe harbour of 5%, applies w.e.f. 01.04.2019, it must be interpreted to apply since the insertion of s. 50C (01.04.2003) because it is curative and removes an incongruity and avoids undue hardship to assesseess (ii) LTCG from penny stocks cannot be treated as bogus if the documentation is in order and no fault is found by the AO | |
The insertion of third proviso (noted above) to Section 50C of the Act is declaratory and curative in nature. That is, the third provisoto Section 50C of the Act relates to computation of value of property as explained by us above, hence it is not a substantive amendment, it is only a procedural amendment therefore the Coordinate Benches of the ITAT used to ignore the variation up to 10%, therefore, the said amendment should be retrospective.Quite clearly therefore, even when the statute does not specifically state so, such amendments, in the light of the detailed discussions above, can only be treated as retrospective and effective from the date related statutory provisions was introduced. Viewed thus, the third proviso to Section50C should be treated as curative in nature and with retrospective effect from 1st April 2003, i.e. the date effective from which Section 50C was introduced.
Recent Comments