Supreme Court of India
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) ... vs Maganlal Chhaganlal (P) Ltd. on 28 November, 1996
Equivalent citations: JT1998(9)SC275, (1997)11SCC557, AIRONLINE 1996 SC 860
Bench: B.P. Jeevan Reddy, K.S. Paripoornan
ORDER
1. Of the six questions which were sought to be raised by the Revenue and which application under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act was dismissed by the High Court, this Court granted special leave in respect of only one of the six questions namely; "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that the purchase and sales by the assessee of shares in the National Rayon Corporation Ltd. (both ordinary and preference) and the Kohinoor Mills Ltd. should be considered as regular dealings and not by way of investment and that the profits or losses in respect of these transactions be taken on revenue account?
2. So far as this question is concerned it appears to be a question of fact and it is concluded by the findings recorded by the Tribunal. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court on this question.
3. Mr. J. Ramamurthy, the learned Counsel for the appellant, however sough to contend that the Revenue had also sought to raise questions regarding the applicability and interpretation of Section 80M of the Act The learned Counsel says that when leave was granted in these matters the decision of this Court in Cloth Traders (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 243 was holding the field. Subsequently, the said decision was overruled in Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India. (1985) 155 ITR 121 Mr. Ramamurthy says that in view of the subsequent decision aforesaid, we must now grant leave in respect of the other questions also and decide them on merits. We do not think that we can do that at this distance of time. We cannot review the order granting leave, more so at this distance of time.
4. The appeals are dismissed accordingly. No costs.