Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 382 - AT - Income TaxIncome from sale of the scrips - LTCG and STCG or business income - Period of holding - Held that:- We as, independent of the concession allowed by the aforesaid CBDT Circular No. 6/2016 (supra), which as observed by us at length hereinabove would not be available to the assessee as regards the profit/gain on sale of scrips which were held by the assessee for a period of less than 12 months, are however of the considered view that the conduct of the assessee company, nature of purchase/sale transactions of the shares as can be deciphered from the records, holding period of the shares, volume of transactions, treatment of the scrips by the assessee in its books of account, nature of business of the assessee company, source of purchase of shares and last but not the least, the very fact that the A.O. while framing ‘regular assessment’ under Sec. 143(3) in the hands of the assessee for the immediately preceding year, viz. A.Y. 2006-07, had accepted that the shares as claimed by the assessee were in the nature of ‘Investments’, and had assessed the loss on the sale of shares under the head ‘Capital gain’ by making a specific mention in the body of the assessment order that the ‘Short term capital loss’ of ₹ 8,35,225/- shown by the assessee on sale of shares shall be C/forward to the succeeding years. We thus in the totality of the aforesaid facts, are thus of the considered view that the conduct of the assessee duly goes to fortify and substantiate its claim , and as such the profit/gain on sale of the shares had rightly been reflected by the assessee company in its return of income under the head ‘Capital gain’. The profits/gains arising in the hands of the assessee company from the sale of the scrips had rightly been reflected in the return of income under the head ‘Capital gain’, viz. LTCG and STCG and the view of the A.O. which thereafter had been sustained by the CIT(A) that the assessee had been carrying out systematic purchase and sale transactions in shares, and thus was liable to be assessed as ‘business activity’ cannot be sustained and is thus vacated. We in the backdrop of our aforesaid observations are of the considered view that the assessee had rightly reflected the income arising in its hands from sale of shares under the head ‘Capital gain’. Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that:- We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) had rightly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Company Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT), and as such had correctly sustained the disallowance of ₹ 78,848/- u/s 14A in the hands of the assessee company. We find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A)
|