TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... market fluctuations. Therefore, respectfully following the decisions of the Coordinate Benches in the cases of Geeta Devi Gaggar [2013 (12) TMI 1414 - ITAT HYDERABAD] and Sunitha Devi Gaggar [2012 (10) TMI 1173 - ITAT HYDERABAD], both of whom are also family members of the assessee, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT (A). In view of the same, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed. - ITA No.1270/Hyd/2015 - - - Dated:- 21-3-2018 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member For The Assessee : Shri Mohd. Afzal For The Revenue : Smt. Suman Mali, DR ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is assessee s appeal for the A.Y 2008-09. In this appeal, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shares purchased and sold along with their holding period. After considering the details, the AO observed that in A.Y 2006-07, the assessee had declared short term capital gain on sale of shares and in A.Ys 2007-08, 2009-10 and 2010-11, she had declared long term capital gain on sale of shares. He also observed that during the relevant financial year, the assessee had purchased majority of shares during that year itself and that the maximum period for which any shares were held by the assessee is 213 days (in the case of Aravind Chemicals) and minimum period is 3 days (in the case of Kilburn Chemicals). The AO also observed that the assessee has purchased the shares of certain companies on a daily basis and has also sold some shares on dai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tivities. Therefore, the AO treated the income from sale of shares as business income and taxed it accordingly. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A), who confirmed the order of the AO and the assessee is in second appeal before us. 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below, while the learned DR, supported the orders of the AO and the CIT (A). 5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that the assessee has been purchasing and selling the shares from the A.Y 2004-05 onwards and has been recording them as investment in her books of account and has been reporting capital gains on the sale of shares, either short term or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompleted u/s 143(1) of the Act. Therefore, it cannot be said that the revenue has been accepting the assessee to be an investor in all the earlier and subsequent A.Ys. Therefore, the principle of uniformity and consistency cannot strictly be applied in the case of the assessee for the relevant A.Y before us. 7. On the merits of the issue, we find that the AO has verified the transactions and has clearly brought out in his order that the assessee has been purchasing the shares of various companies during the relevant A.Y and has sold them within a short span of days and the average period of holding of shares is only 58 days. Even the assessee admitted that some of the shares are being purchased and sold on the very same day and without p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the learned Counsel for the assessee are to be the effect that were the shares are held as investment, then the income from sale of such shares should be considered as capital gains only. The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ms. Geeta Devi Gaggar vs. JCIT in ITA No.1380/Hyd/2010 and Smt. Sunita Devi Gaggar vs. ACIT in ITA No.910/Hyd/2011 have considered similar transactions and has confirmed the findings of the AO and the CIT (A) that the assessees therein were engaged in trading of shares. The relevant paragraph in the case of Ms. Geeta Devi Gaggar (ITA No.1380/Hyd/2010) is reproduced hereunder: 7. We have considered the issue. Even though the department has accepted the assessee's incomes on the gains from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te' on 01.09.2005 and again purchased some of shares on 05.09.2005 which have been sold immediately in the same month partly and later the balance. Not only in the above share, even in the case of 'MULTI-ARC IN' assessee has purchased large number of shares in the month of July,05 between 19th and 25th, and sold them by month of August and November '05 in a span of 130 days and again purchased large number of shares on 10.02.2006 to be sold again on 21.03.2006. As seen from the de-mat statement, except in the case of Saksoft Limited (200 shares) there is no closing balance in any of the shares purchased. These indicate that the intention is not to make investments for long periods. In these circumstances, we agree with the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
