Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Versus Ramniwas Ramjivan Kasat

2017 (6) TMI 351 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Addition u/s 68 - assessee had sold certain shares, the very purchasers were found to be bogus - Held that:- As facts recorded by the Tribunal would suggest, the shares were purchased by the assessee during the period relevant to the Assessment Year 2005-2006. The return for the said year was scrutinized by the Revenue. The Assessing Officer did not disturb the investment. It would therefore later on not be open to the Assessing Officer to make addition with the aid of Section 68 of the Act when .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r, if the assessee desires to treat the income arising from the transfer thereof as Capital Gain, the same shall not be put to dispute by the Assessing Officer. In other words, the Revenue would not pursue this issue if the necessary ingredients are satisfied, only rider being the stand taken by the assessee in a particular year would be followed in the subsequent years also and the assessee would not be allowed to adopt a contrary stand in such subsequent years. - Tribunal took the relevant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

auna M Bhatt, Advocate ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) These appeals concern the same assessee and involve similar questions in similar factual background. They have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. We may record facts from Tax Appeal No. 307 of 2017. The appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgement of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31.5.2016. Following questions are raised for our consideration. (A)Whether on the facts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT is justified in confirming the decision of the CIT(A) in holding the share transaction as investments despite the fact that motive of transactions admittedly was earning the profit (maximization of wealth in words of assessee) coupled with huge number of transactions with very less holding period, many were less than a month, transaction to stock ration was very high? (C) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d certain shares, the very purchasers were found to be bogus. The Assessing Officer having ruled against the assessee, the issue was carried in appeal. The CIT dismissed the appeal. The question therefore travelled at the hands of the assessee before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the purchase of the relevant shares were made during the month of April, 2004 and sold in the months of May, June and July, 2005. The purchases thus made during the Financial Year 2004-2005 have been accepted in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ction 68 of the Act when such shares were in the later years sold. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the Revenue on this issue, we are in agreement with the Tribunal. As facts recorded by the Tribunal would suggest, the shares were purchased by the assessee during the period relevant to the Assessment Year 2005-2006. The return for the said year was scrutinized by the Revenue. The Assessing Officer did not disturb the investment. It would therefore later on not be open to the Assessing Officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

shares, the frequency of transactions and other relevant considerations, the assessee was dealing in the business of buying and selling the shares and the income should be taxed as a business income and the Tribunal took the relevant facts into consideration and referred to the circular of the CBDT dated 29.2.2016 and held that the return should be taxed as capital gain, be it long term or short term, as the case may be, and not as a business income. 6. Whether to tax the income generated from t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ions. The CBTD therefore in order to reduce the litigations, issued the said circular dated 29.2.2016, relevant portion which reads as under: 2. Over the years, the courts have laid down different parameters to distinguish the shares held as investments from the shares held as stock-in-trade. The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) has also, through Instruction No.1827, dated August 31, 1989 and Circular No.4 of 2007 dated June 15, 2007, summarized the said principles for guidance of the fiel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

art of shares/securities transactions takes place in respect of the listed ones and with a view to reduce litigation and uncertainty in the matter, in partial modification to the aforesaid circulars, further instructs that the Assessing Officers in holding whether the surplus generated from sale of listed shares or other securities would be treated as Capital Gain or Business Income, shall take into account the following- (a) Where the assessee itself, irrespective of the period of holding the l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version