vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 130/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 Nirmal Kumar Dugar cuke The ITO, 4451, K.G.B Ka Rasta Vs. Ward-2(1), Johari Bazar 302003 Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No. ABRPD3523B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Sauravh Harsh, Adv., Ld. AR jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Ld. DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 09/10/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIALMEMBER .

Appellant-assessee has challenged here impugned order dated

4.12.2024 passed by Learned CIT(A), whereby his appeal filed against assessment order dated 20.11.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer, in relation to the Assessment Year 2016-17 has been dismissed, and as a result, the assessment order assessing the income of the assessee at Rs.

13,63,700/-, has been sustained.

2. Vide impugned assessment order, an addition of Rs. 12,59,537/-was made by way of income from house property.

Yet another addition of Rs. 1,04,155/-was made by way of income from other sources.

3. Assessing Officer made the above said two additions after arriving at the conclusion that the assessee was engaged in shares and securities transactions, speculative in nature, of the value of Rs. 18,39,385/-in view of provisions of section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and further that the assessee had failed to establish business loss of Rs. 18,39,385/-from the transactions relating to shares and securities.

The assessee challenged the assessment order, but Learned CIT(A)

dismissed the appeal and confirmed said order.

4. Hence, this appeal by the assessee before this Appellate Tribunal.

5. Arguments heard. File perused.

6. Admittedly, in the return of income relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17, the assessee declared his total income as “Nil”. Case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS. In this regard, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was served upon the assessee.

During said proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that in the computation of income, the assessee had reflected business loss of Rs.

18,39,385/-from the transactions relating to shares and securities.

In order to verify the claim of the assessee regarding business loss, and to find out if said loss was speculative or non-speculative in nature, information was requisitioned from M/s Hem Securities Limited.

Information received from the said company revealed that earlier the appellant was engaged in purchase and sale of shares, which the assessee had shown under the head “Capital gain”.

It also transpired that the assessee was also engaged in the shares and transactions as derivatives. The above named company also provided to the Assessing Officer client delivery and speculation details(derivatives) separately. From said details, it transpired that the assessee had booked the loss through transaction entered in derivatives at Rs. 18,39,385/-, which were actually speculative in nature. Details in this regard are available in the assessment order, page 2 to 42. That is how, the Assessing Officer had to issue notice under section 142(1) of the Act to the assessee confronting with the details furnished by him as available in P & L Account, wherein loss of Rs. 18,39,385/-was reflected as business loss and found to have been set off from the income earned from house property and other sources. Accordingly, the assessee was called upon to show cause as to why said amount be not treated as speculative loss in view of the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act and charged to income tax upto the income of Rs. 13,62,692/-found to have been set off by him under the head house property to the tune of Rs. 12,59,537/-and under