9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. 1. The following questions of law have been formulated in the appeal filed by the revenue against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 10th February 2009: "a) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in treating the income from sale of 7,59,003 shares for Rs. 5,00,12,879/as an income from short term ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see as regards to the nature of transaction without appreciating that the entries in the books of accounts alone are not conclusive proof to decide the income?" 2. The Tribunal has entered a pure finding of fact that the assessee was engaged in two different types of transactions. The first set of transactions involved investment in shares. The second set of transactions involved dealing in share ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wo distinct types of trnsactions namely, those by way of investment on one hand and those for the purposes of business on the other hand. Question (a) above, does not raise any substantial question of law. 3. In so far as Question (b) is concerned, the Tribunal has observed in paragraph 8.1 of its judgment that the assessee has followed a consistent practice in regard to the nature of the activit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, does not also raise any substantial question. 4. In so far as Question (c) is concerned, again there cannot be any dispute about the basic proposition that entries in the books of account alone are not conclusive in determining the nature of income. The Tribunal has applied the correct principle in arriving at the decision in the facts of the present case. The finding of fact does not call ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
