TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 1067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r has not brought in any fresh evidence in his Assessment Order for the present year to the contrary. He has simply referred to the magnitude of share transaction and come to his own conclusions about the intentions of the appellant. The detailed evidences and write up given by the appellant in support her arguments, substantiate her claim of being an investor. It is also clear that the assertion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the revenue against the impugned order dated 27.01.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A. No.1434/Kol/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08 on the following questions. I) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal was justified in law upholding the order of the CIT by treating the gains from share transaction as capi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dealing in earlier years is not factor. Heard Ms. Das De, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned senior Advocate for the respondent. We find the Tribunal while negating the conclusion of the revenue had referred to the order of the CIT(A). The relevant portion of the order passed by the CIT(A) is as under: 5. The contentions of the appellant as summed up above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be challenged on the basis of her own records and transactions which could indicate that it is actually doing trading business. This is not there in the appellant s case and the A.O. has failed to do so other than making a longwinding analysis of the guidelines laid out in CBDT Circular No.4/2007. The reliance of Assessing Officer on the decision of ITO Vs. Lily Exports PVt. Ltd. of Hon ble I.T.A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 43,59,492/- is to be treated as offered by appellant in its Income-tax Return as Long Term Capital Gain and ₹ 18,39,391/- as Short Term Capital Gains. The questions raised do not include a challenge on perversity. The findings of the Commissioner of Appeals is on facts concurred by the Tribunal. We find, therefore, no substantial question of law arises. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
