Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 428 - AT - Income TaxClaim of STCG and LTCG - Profit arriving from purchase & sale of shares instead of business income treated by the AO – Held that:- The decision in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax 25(3) Versus Chetan K. Mehta [2011 (3) TMI 874 - ITAT MUMBAI] followed - The conduct of the assessee in showing income from delivery based transactions as STCG and non-delivery based transaction as business income only shows that but for actual delivery even income from those transactions would have been considered as speculative income and business income – Relying upon CIT v. Gopal Purohit [2010 -TMI - 35188 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] - assessee has followed a consistent practice in regard to the nature of the activities, the manner of keeping records and the presentation of shares as investment at the end of the year - the conclusion of the CIT(A) that the income from sale of shares declared by the assessee as STCG has to be accepted is correct - the income shown by the assessee from the sale of shares is to be taxed under the head "short term capital gain" and "long term capital gain" – Decided against Revenue. Deduction under house property – Held that:- The assessee has made initial claim of deduction of interest of ₹ 15 lakhs on the borrowings which were utilised for acquiring residential premises as deductible business expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) - the assessee filed revised statement of computation of income whereby the claim of ₹ 15 lakhs was given up and was disallowed by the assessee himself and instead interest claimed of ₹ 1.50 lakhs was made under section 24(b) which was the legally correct claim while computing the income from house property - Even if such a claim has been rejected by the AO on the ground that the same should have been made by way of revised return of income, however, the same does not put any fetters on the powers of the appellate authorities to entertain such a legal claim if all the facts necessary for the adjudication are available on records – Relying upon Goetze (India) Limited Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME Court] - no new claim of interest has been made except for the fact that the right amount of interest has been claimed under the head "interest" and the amount of claim made in the earlier return of income - such a claim cannot be entertained as it is a trite law that it is the duty of the AO to allow deductions as per the statute under the right provisions of the Act – thus, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld – Decided against Revenue.
|