9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hgal, Advocate. ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. (Oral) Having heard counsel for the parties, we frame the following substantial question of law in these appeals, which pertain to assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09:- 'Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal of the appellant-assessee for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 observing that they do not find any merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal has not discussed the factual matrix or gone into the question of number of transactions relating to sale and purchase, the period for which shares were held and other relevant criteria, which have been elucidated in Circular No.4 of 2007 dated 15th June, 2007 as well as the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs. Associated Industrial Company Pvt. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also did not go in depth and detail and preferred to rely upon the earlier orders. In the first appellate order relating to assessment year 2007-08, reference was made to transactions in shares of 8 companies, which were held for a period ranging from 6 days to 97 days, but learned counsel for the appellant-assessee states that there were other shares too, which were held for longer period. For t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d long-term capital gains and, therefore, the stand of the appellant-assessee is that he was an investor as well as trader in shares. 9. In view of the aforesaid factual position, we have to hold that the Tribunal has not dealt with the contentions raised after examining and ascertaining the facts in detail. Answer or conclusion has been recorded without reference to facts of the particular year. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
