Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Dcit 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs Anvil Share And Stock Broking P.Ltd, ... on 27 October, 2017

M/S. Madura Biotech (P) Ltd., Haridwar vs Dcit, New Delhi on 23 July, 2024

The judgement in the case of DCIT vs. SMK Shares & Stock Broking (P) Ltd. (2010) 8 taxmann.com 120 (Mum) was in regard to an assessment year 2005-06 while the AO while passing the assessment orders for earlier years had not disputed assessee's claim regarding profit on sale of investment. In that case, it was also established that the assessee had maintained separate investment portfolio. In the 10 ITA No.2593/Del/2015 case of the present assessee, it is second year of the business and half way through the financial year, the trading was initiated in shares. Thus, by merely mentioning the shares to be the investments, benefit of Circular No.4 of 2007 dated 15.06.2007 cannot be granted.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - G S Pannu - Full Document

Jitednra V Shah, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax

3. Learned CIT(A) took that the Assessing Officer has admitted the profit on sale of shares in the earlier years as assessee's income under the head capital gains. The shares held by the assessee at the end of the year, have also been admitted by the Assessing Officer, as investment by valuing them at cost and this fact is evident from the balance sheet filed by the assessee which is kept on record. He, therefore, took that the intention of the assessee is to treat such shares as investment. Going by the statement of the assessee that more than 95% of the short term capital gain, is admitted only from one script, he entertained the view that the assessee cannot be said to be a regular trader in shares. The Assessing Officer made the assessment by wrong assumption of facts in as much as the assessee did not sell his shares in a short period but effected sales after holding major portion of the shares for more than 60 days. Placing reliance on the judgment by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT, reported in 29 SOT 117 and in the case of Janak S. Rangwalla Vs. ACIT, reported in 11 SOT 627 and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. SMK Shares and Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., passed 4 ITA No.4644/2011 in ITA No.799/2009, vide order dated 24-11-2010, he directed the Assessing Officer to accept the claim of the appellant under the head "income from short term capital gains", specifically, when there are no borrowed funds utilized for investments in shares.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1