Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Iv v. Shri. Jayant N.parekh

ASN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.145 OF 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax,Central IV...Appellant.v. Shri. Jayant N.Parekh...Respondent. Mr. Tejveer Singh with Ms. Padma Divakar for the petitioner.Mr. A.K.Jasani with Mr. P.C.Tripathi for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : 09TH JANUARY, 2013 PC: The revenue has come up in appeal against the order dated 6/8/2010 passed by the Tribunal and has re-framed the following questions of law for consideration of this Court. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that the speculation loss of Rs.1,45,33,058/- claimed by the assessee is genuine loss? 2)The respondent-assessee is carrying on business of shares and stock broking. For the assessment year 2001-02 the respondent assesee had claimed Rs.1.45 crores as speculation loss. The Assessing officer denied the speculation loss as respondent assessee was member of Ketan Parekh Group of entities. Further, on the basis of the report of the SEBI and the Joint Parliamentary Committee(JPC), the Assessing officer came to the conclusion that the speculation loss as claimed is not a genuine transaction. Consequently, the set off of loss claimed was denied. 3)In appeal, the CIT (Appeal) confirmed the order of the Assessing officer. In second appeal the Tribunal in its order dated6/8/2010 records the fact that the lower authorities had not disallowed the speculation loss for want of documents but only on the ground that the respondent was involved in the Security Scam of 2001. Further the Tribunal records a finding that nothing has been brought on record to suggest that the respondent assessee was involved in the scam as the name of the respondent assessee does not appear either in the JPC report or in any of the orders of the SEBI as being involved in the Security Scam. Moreover, at the time of hearing before the Tribunal the respondent assessee was asked to explain the entries appearing in the bank statement along with supporting documents to support its claim. The respondent assessee took the Tribunal through the paper book containing details of broker wise speculation profit and loss statement and explained the entries. The representative of the revenue before the Tribunal was unable to controvert the documents and entries explaining the speculation loss. On the basis of the above explanation, the Tribunal was satisfied that the speculation loss incurred by the assessee was genuine. Those findings of the Tribunal are findings of fact and hence calls for no interference. 4)In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S.SANKELCHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)