9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of transactions in shares. The Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the shares in respect of which the loss is claimed were in the nature of investment and, therefore, the loss incurred in respect thereof would be capital loss and not a business / trading loss. 2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, however, found as a fact that the shares in question were held as stock-in-trade. The learned counsel for the revenue drew our attention to an order dated 12.10.2004, whereby the Appellate Tribunal, in respect of this very assessment year, had, in the first round, set aside the order dated 09.04.2001 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who had deleted the loss of Rs 18,06,620/- incurr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed in appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the respondent / assessee preferred the said appeal (ITA 1133/Del/06) before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99, which was allowed by the Tribunal by the order dated 17.10.2008, which is impugned before us. From the impugned order, it is apparent that on behalf of the assessee, it was argued that the presentation of accounts in the balance sheet for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 were identical to the presentation of accounts in the balance sheet in the current year, i.e., assessment year 1998-99. More particularly, it was pointed out that in the earlier years also, though some of the shares were shown as investment, they, in fact, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as prevailing in the current year as well as that in the earlier years. 6. In view of the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the findings sought to be challenged before us are in the nature of factual findings and no question of law, what to speak of a substantial question of law, arises for our consideration. Although it was sought to be argued that a question on perversity could be framed, on going through the impugned order as well as the orders of the lower authorities, we do not find any substance in such a plea. A finding of fact has been returned with regard to the nature of the loss in respect of the year in question after the Tribunal examined the material on record. Consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
