9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the market conditions. Thus, the sale of shares was only with a view to protect the amount invested by the appellant which would not convert the investment into stock-in trade. It is found from the balance sheet filed that the appellant held shares as investment and after transferring the shares in the name of the appellant the shares were sold as evidenced by the demat account and the STT was paid at a higher rate application to the investor and stand of the A.O. is no longer valid in the light of the decision of CIT Versus Gopal Purohit [2010 (1) TMI 7 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 4050/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 6-6-2012 - SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA JJ. Revenue by : Shri C.G.K. Na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 65.41 Apart from the above, from the profit and loss account for the year ending 31.03.2004 and capital account for the year ending 31.3.2005, the A.O. observed that for A.Y. 2004-05 the assessee had treated the income received from trading as business income whereas for the subsequent assessment years i.e A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07 2007-08 the assessee had classified his income/loss from share trading as short term capital gain and long term capital gain. The A.O. held that though the nature and type of expenses were same as those of A.Y. 2004-05, the assessee debited all the expenses in the capital account for the A.Ys. 2005-06, 2006-07 2007-08. The A.O. concluded that the expenses were debited to capital account with a view to re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he shares are bought and sold within short period, while some are not sold due to market conditions and their holding with assessee remains beyond few days., it will not change the nature of transactions and the assessee is very well engaged in the business of share trading, which denote that the motive of the assessee is to carry on business in shares to book profit rather than investment in shares. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 5. At the time of hearing the ld. D.R. supports the order of the A.O. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount and paid STT at a high rate as applicable to the investor. It is found from the balance sheet filed that the appellant held shares as investment and after transferring the shares in the name of the appellant the shares were sold as evidenced by the demat account and the STT was paid at a higher rate application to the investor. It is true that the A.O. did not accept the claim of the appellant for A.Y.2005-2006 which was confirmed by C1T(A) but the C1T(A) decided the issue before the Hon ble Mumbai Tribunal rendered its decision in the case of Gopal Purohit (29 SOT 117) and subsequent to the above decision, the same CIT(A) decided the same issue in the case of Gopal Purohit for A.Y.2006- 2007 otherwise by order dated 18.06.2009 in IT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
