TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that the impugned order has been passed relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of “Mukesh R. Marolia” [2005 (12) TMI 457 - ITAT MUMBAI] and the findings are essentially findings of facts. Hence, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. - Decided against revenue - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 300 OF 2013 - - - Dated:- 21-1-2015 - G. S. KULKARNI, M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. 68 of Income Tax Act,1961, was received from share trading activities as L.T.C.G. and entitled of exemption u/s.10(38) of Income Tax Act,1961 ? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal, Mumbai H Bench Mumbai was justified on relying the decision of Mr.Mukesh Ratilal Marolia decided by the Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay despite the fact the said d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various accommodation entries to various parties. 4. On first appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by his order dated 24.12.2009 allowed the respondent's appeal. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the Assessee- Respondent had provided to the Assessing Officer confirmation of Bombay Stock Exchange concerning total transaction of shares of Maruti Infra and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rolia and records a finding that the facts therein are similar to the facts in the present case. Consequently, the impugned order holds that purchase and sale of the shares made by the respondent - assessee were genuine transaction and addition made under Section 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer was not warranted. 6. We find that both, the CIT (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
