Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.18 seconds)C.I.T Central-Iii vs M/S Excel Industries Ltd on 8 October, 2013
24. Thus, in view of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Radha Swami Sat Sang, vs. CIT 293 ITR 321(SC)
and CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295(SC),
upholding principal of consistency and in view of the aforesaid
circular of the CBDT and in view of facts of this case as
discussed above, claim of the assessee deserves to be upheld.
Therefore, after taking into all the facts and circumstances of
the case and in view of the detailed discussion made by us in
earlier part of our order, we find that the detailed findings
recorded by Ld. CIT(A) for upholding the claim of the assessee
by treating the income arising from purchase and sale of
shares as assessable under the head of 'capital gains' are well
reasoned and do not require any interference from our side.
Therefore, order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue is
upheld and Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is hereby
dismissed.
Sanghvi Apoorva Lalubhai (Huf), Mumbai vs Acit 16(2), Mumbai on 11 November, 2016
"The issue, whether the income from sale and purchase
of shares in a particular case should be treated as
capital gain or business, income has been a
debatable issue and there are conflicting decisions
of the Tribunal on this issue. Each case is, therefore, to
be based on its own factual situation. It is possible for an
investor to sell shares after holding for less than a year
in order to reshuffle portfolio. In the present case, it is not
in dispute that: the average holding period is 178 days.
The 1TAT Pune Bench in the case of Apoorva Patni vs
ACIT (supra) has held that "having regard to operating
maximum of a discretionary portfolio management
agreement, the relationship between the PMS
provider and the assessee cannot be contempt as that of
a mere agent as understood in the common parlance."
Cit vs Kapur Minning Equipment (P.) Ltd. on 20 July, 2007
Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Kapur Investments P.
Ltd. 61 taxmann.com 91 Hon'ble Karnataka High Court had
20 Sachin R. Tendulkar
adopted the similar view following the aforesaid judgments of
Hon'ble Delhi High Court by inter alia observing as under:
1