IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jayesh Sojpar Karnia HUF, Income Tax Officer, Block-A-403, 4^th Floor, Ward 30(1)(5), Jagmagia Centre, Room no-512, C-13, Liberty Garden Ext, Vs. 5^th Floor, Nahar Nagar, Malad West, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai B.K.C., Maharashtra – 400 064 Mumbai PAN: AACHJ1552N Maharashtra - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Present for:

Assessee by : Shri Shashank Mehta, Ld. A.R.

Revenue by : Shri Srinivas P., Ld. Sr.D.R.

Date of Hearing : 02.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.05.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 12.09.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2014-15.

2. In the instant case, the Assessee on dated 11.02.2013 had purchased 10,000 shares at Rs.20 each of M/s. Santoshima Tradelinks Limited by paying a cheque of Rs.2,00,000/- of Central Bank of India, which was encashed on 15.02.2013. Subsequently, M/s. Santoshima Tradelinks Limited amalgamated with M/s. Sunrise Asian Ltd. and consequently 10,000 shares of M/s. Sunrise Asian Ltd. were allotted. Subsequently, the Assessee got dematerialized the said shares on dated 11.11.2013 and sold 5120 shares through online platform i.e. Bombay Stock Exchange on a total consideration of Rs.25,15,320/- from 14^th March to 25^th March 2014 and consequently earned the long term capital gain of Rs.24,04,115/- and claimed the same as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. The Assessing Officer (AO), by considering the investigation carried out by Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata and the mode of acquisition of the shares by the Assessee and unusual rise in the prices of share, findings of the investigation wing at Mumbai, analysis of transactions, failure of the Assessee to discharge his onus, ignorance of the Assessee about shares and penny stock companies, financial analysis of the penny stock companies, formality statement of Mr. V.V. Bhat and the modus operandi of arranged transactions, ultimately disallowed the claim of the Assessee and made the additions of Rs. 25,15,320/- u/s 68 of the Act and Rs.1,00,613/- being commission @ 4% of Rs.25,15,320/-

as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act.

3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said additions before the Ld. Commissioner, however, of no avail, as the Ld. Commissioner more or less on the same reasoning of the AO, affirmed the aforesaid additions by dismissing the appeal of the Assessee.

4. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said additions before this Tribunal by filing instant appeal. Admittedly, the Assessee, during the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings before the Ld. Commissioner and before us, has submitted the computation of income, documents pertaining to the purchase of shares – contract cum sale of 10,000 shares of M/s. Santoshima Tradelinks Limited and debit note issued by Silver Rise Multi Trading Pvt. Ltd., on spot basis, share transfer application along with share certificates of M/s. Santoshima Tradelinks Limited in the name of Assessee, letter dated 21.06.2013 issued by Sunrise Asian Ltd. for allotting shares in pursuance to amalgamation scheme, bank statement of Central Bank of India reflecting payment made for purchase of shares, contract notes for sale of shares, bank statement reflecting receipts from sale of shares and demat statement for the period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2014, in order to demonstrate the genuineness of the transaction and to discharge the prima-facie onus cast u/s 68 and 69C of the Act.

5. Recently, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, in the case of Mr. Rambilas S Agarwal in ITA No.3238/M/2023 decided on 08.04.2025, has also dealt with the identical share/scrip of Sunrise