9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 115 - AT - Income TaxTrading Income as LTCG u/s 10(33) Claim on trading income as Long Term Capital Gains LTCG earned on share transaction Held that - shares purchased by assessee were listed/quoted shares in recognized stock exchange - Rate of purchase are verifiable from rates quoted at stock exchange - Shares were held and possessed by her for more than 12 months - Entire transactions of purchase and sales of shares are duly recorded and found supported by broker s contract notes, bills for purchase and sales of shares issued by approved stock brokers - From evidence available on record, it is proved that assessee s transactions of purchase and sale of shares are genuine - Department failed to disprove claim of assessee - Do not find any fallacy or infirmity in finding of CIT(A) and uphold same Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Appeal against order of CIT(A) for A.Y 2005-06 regarding trading income treated as Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) earned on shared transaction. Detailed Analysis: 1. Issue of Trading Income as LTCG: - The appeal filed by the department challenges the order of the CIT(A) regarding the treatment of trading income of Rs. 11,07,548/- as LTCG earned on a shared transaction for A.Y 2005-06. - The assessee initially declared total income of Rs. 6,18,926/- in the Return of Income (ROI) filed on 1.8.2005, including LTCG from the sale of shares of Ram Krishna Fin Cap. - The Assessing Officer (A.O.) reopened the assessment under section 147 r.w.s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to doubts regarding the actual date of transaction of the shares. - The A.O. questioned the claim of LTCG made by the assessee based on suspicions arising from search proceedings in the case of a third party, M/s B.C. Purohit & Co., but failed to provide concrete evidence contradicting the genuineness of the transactions. - The CIT(A) found that the shares were purchased through registered brokers, payments were made via account payee cheques, and the transactions were supported by broker's contract notes and bills, indicating genuine transactions. - The CIT(A) held that the A.O.'s suspicions lacked substantiation and logic, as no evidence was presented to disprove the authenticity of the share transactions. - The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's appeal as they failed to provide substantial evidence to challenge the genuineness of the LTCG claimed by the assessee. 2. Conclusion: - The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s findings, emphasizing the authenticity of the share transactions and the lack of concrete evidence presented by the revenue to refute the LTCG claimed by the assessee. - The appeal of the revenue against the treatment of trading income as LTCG was dismissed, upholding the decision in favor of the assessee for A.Y 2005-06. This detailed analysis highlights the key aspects and reasoning behind the judgment regarding the treatment of trading income as LTCG in the specified assessment year, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence and substantiation in tax-related disputes.
|
