The assessee claimed long-term capital gains under section 10(38) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which included the sale transactions effected during the year on the scrip named Sunrise Asian Ltd. During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer called for information under section 133(6) from the Bombay Stock Exchange. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee had purchased shares of one CT directly from the company on August 21, 2011 and sold the shares of Sunrise Asian Ltd The assessee explained that Conart Traders Ltd was later amalgamated with Sunrise Asian Ltd by a court order dated January 24, 2013. The Assessing Officer based on the information received from the Investigation Wing and considering the assessee’s submissions made an addition towards unexplained unaccounted income and brought it to tax under section 115BBF. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed his order. The Tribunal, on the facts, deleted the addition holding that charging of tax at the rate of 30 per cent. under section 115BBE was not applicable. On appeal dismissing the appeal, that the Tribunal had arrived at a finding that shares of Sunrise Asian Ltd sold by the assessee could not be doubted as bogus and exemption under section 10(38) was rightly availed of by the assessee and that the presumption drawn by the Assessing Officer was not corroborated by any evidence to establish the alleged non-genuine transaction by the assessee. The Tribunal had considered the fact that the assessee had held the shares for a long period of two and half years and sold them, which was not even found to be rigged by the Securities and Exchange Board of India also and had rightly held that the claim of the assessee for exemption of long-term capital gains under section 10(38) was not bogus. The Tribunal had also considered the decision in PCIT v. Jagat Pravinbhai Sarabhai(2023) 21 ITR-OL 366 (Guj)(HC)) 2022 SCC OnLine Guj 2619. The Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of sale proceeds of the shares on account of unexplained income under section 68. (AY. 2014-15)
PCIT v. Divyaben Prafulchandra Parmar (2024) 467 ITR 146 (Guj)(HC)
S. 68 : Cash credits-Long-term capital gains-Penny stock-Sunrise Asian Ltd-Exemption-Information from Investigation Wing-Presumptions is not corroborated by evidence-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition is affirmed.[S. 10(38), 45, 115BBE, 133(6), 260A]