Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

It was also submitted during the course of scrutiny assessment th at as per N SE Circular N o. N SE/CMO/0146/2004 dat ed 10.11.2004, for the purposes of STT calculation, the sale value is first calculated by using the VWAP (Volume weighted average price) method as expl ained in the said circular. This derived sale value is then t he basis for form 10DB on which STT is further calculated. T his Circular is at Page 40 to 42 of PB. Therefore, it is not always a case where " Sale Value" as appearing in a contract note matches with "Value" for calcul ating STT (in Form 10DB).

3.02 During the financial year 2015-16, th e assesse e t ransacted in shares of Ceat Limited on 5 different dat es as per T able A given below:

TABLE A (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) Date of Contract Qty. Qty. Sale value after Speculation Form 10DB Form 10DB value transactio Note No Bough Sold brokerage gain/loss value (other than Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Khatuwala Computech Pvt. Limited n t (Deliver) delivery) 1.4.15 NR/13511 2500 2065330.40(page1 2067400(pag

Values given in "Reconciliation St atement of Value of Sale of Shares vis-a-vis Value of Sale of Shares appearing in Fo rm 10DB in Exhibit - 2.

The assessee incurred specul ation loss and hedging loss out of transactions in relation to shares of Ceat Limited as det ailed in Exhibit 3 and as per details in Table A above. These figures of Contract Notes (Column H) are matching with the values given in "Reconciliation St atement of Speculative Gain j (Loss) vis-a-vis Value appearing in Fo rm No. 10DB in Exhibit - 3.

Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Khatuwala Computech Pvt. Limited

7. Further th e learned C IT(A) while co nfirming the above addition observed at Page 9 of his order dated 05-06 -2019:-

"I h ave considered t he submission of th e appellant and perused the relevant assessment records. The A. O. h ad added back Rs.1 ,52,000 which represented th e under valuation of shares as per reconciliat ion st atement submitted by th e appellant. The A/ R of t he appellant in his submission h ad h eld that the difference arose due to the methodology of charging SIT by the broker in compliance with NSE Circular No . N SE/C MO/0146/2004 dated 10.11.2004. T he A.O. held that th e difference in value of sales reflected in cont ract note and value reflected in Fo rm 10DB was bound to arise because of the methodology of computing sales fo r the purpose of charging SIT . There is not much merit in t he claim of the appellant. He could not reconcile in difference in turnover as reflected in the books and in Fo rm 10DB. Form 10DB is evidence of payment of SIT o n t ransactions entered through recognized stock exchange. T herefo re, there cannot be any difference in turnover bet ween SIT and books. The A/ R of th e appell ant h ad emph asized the point that the method fo r comput ing t urnover fo r arriving SIT is different . However, there is not much credence in the submissio n of the appellant. The Circular No. NSE/CMO/0146/2004 dat ed 11.11.2004 only relates to comput ation of SIT and does not relate to comput ation of turno ver. The addition of Rs.l ,52,OOO is sust ained. This ground of appeal fails and is th erefore, not allowed.