IN THE INCOME TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER&

SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 7524/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

(Assessment Year: 2009-10)

Assessee by Shri Sunil Jain Revenue by Shri Surendra Mohan, SR DR Date of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR,AM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.09.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], for Assessment Year 2009–10, whereby the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty of Rs. 1,29,410/- levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961[hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] vide his order dated

16.03.2022.

Facts of the Case

2. The assessee, an individual, filed her return of income for A.Y. 2009–10 declaring a total income of Rs. 62,780/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer by issuance of notice under section 148 dated 28.03.2013, invoking the provisions of section 147 of the Act. The reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing relating to alleged bogus share transactions, purportedly linked to entities controlled by Shri Mukesh Choksi. After completion of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer passed an order under section 143(3) read with section 147, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 7,09,828/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 62,780/-. The addition primarily related to an amount of Rs. 6,36,866/-, treated as unexplained/bogus share transactions.

3. Aggrieved by the reassessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Thane. Since identical issues arising out of alleged bogus share transactions were involved for A.Ys. 2008–09, 2009–10 and 2010– 11, the CIT(A)-1, Thane disposed of all the three appeals by a common order dated 25.05.2018 in ITA Nos. 408, 409 and

410/2014–15.

4. In so far as Assessment Year 2009–10 is concerned, the CIT(A) recorded that the assessee had disclosed in the return of income:



Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs. 6,47,054/-, 

Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) of Rs. 72,596/-, and 

income from other sources of Rs. 52,180/-.

Thus, the amounts which were subjected to dispute were already disclosed in the return of income, though claimed under specific heads and with a particular tax treatment.

5. During the appellate proceedings, the learned Authorised Representative explained that the LTCG of Rs. 6,47,054/- arose from sale of IFCI shares which were purchased in earlier years and sold during the year under consideration. As regards STCG of Rs. 72,596/-, it was submitted that the same had already been offered to tax in the return of income. However, during the course of appellate proceedings, and as recorded by the CIT(A) in paragraph 5.8 of the appellate order, the assessee, to buy peace of mind, agreed to sustain the addition of Rs. 6,47,054/- on account of alleged bogus LTCG, subject to application of tax as per law. The CIT(A)-1, Thane, by the said common order dated

25.05.2018, held as under for A.Y. 2009–10:

-

the addition of Rs. 6,36,866/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained investment in shares was deleted;

-

the amount of Rs. 6,47,054/-, though disclosed as LTCG, was sustained as income on the basis of the assessee’s admission; and -

the STCG of Rs. 72,596/-, having already been offered to tax, could not be taxed again.

Accordingly, the appeal for A.Y. 2009–10 was partly allowed.

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid appellate order and the rectification order under section 154 dated 19.06.2018, the