9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 shares of BSEL in lieu of the membership card, then, that is by itself and without anything more not a case of transfer in the year under consideration. If the transfer has not taken place now but may occur in future then all the issues that have been raised and considered by us in the appeal of Walfort (2014 (10) TMI 184 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) are identical. It is precisely this basis on which we have proceeded and, therefore, as held in the other case of Walfort Shares and Stock Broking Private Limited that the question of law had projected is purely academic. - No substantial question of law - Decided against revenue. Disallowance made under section 14A - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that:- Question answered by a Division Bench o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justice. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the Appellant submits that the protective addition is uncalled for and is required to be deleted. 3. Mr. Gupta also invited our attention to the order of the Commissioner and submits that the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner held that in the given facts and circumstances protective addition was justified. The position is that the operations of Bombay Stock Exchange have been corporatised and demutualised resulting in the member being given benefit. The benefit is that the trading right continues but in lieu of the membership card, the shares of the stock exchange are allotted. In that process, the Assessing Officer has come to the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de by Mr. Gupta that we are referring to the facts in this case. A question of law and which is projected on page 3 of the paper-book concerns the addition on account of depreciation on Bombay Stock Exchange card on protective basis under Section 55(2)(ab) of Income tax Act. In fact the reframed question of law says that the Tribunal was not justified in deleting the protective addition made by the Assessing Officer towards depreciation claimed by the assessee of ₹ 2,27,50,000/-. 6. The assessee is a company which is engaged in the business of shares and securities broking, jobbing and investment in shares and securities. The business of the assessee mainly comprises of buying/selling of shares and securities on behalf of the clien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f BSEL in lieu of the membership card, then, that is by itself and without anything more not a case of transfer in the year under consideration. If the transfer has not taken place now but may occur in future then all the issues that have been raised and considered by us in the appeal of Walfort (Supra) are identical. 8. It is precisely this basis on which we have proceeded and, therefore, as held in the other case of Walfort Shares and Stock Broking Private Limited that the question of law had projected is purely academic. 9. We do not think that any deviation is permissible and possible when the revenue itself states that the case is similar to that of Walfort. The distinction as drawn or attempted to be drawn is without any basis. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
