Income from Share Sale Upheld as Capital Gain, Rejecting Revenue's Challenge

The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai upheld the categorization of income from the sale of shares as short term capital gain, rejecting the Revenue's challenge to treat it as business income for the assessment year 2007-08. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of consistency, noting that the Assessing Officer had accepted similar claims in previous and subsequent years. Relying on a Tribunal decision and citing lack of evidence to justify a departure from past practice, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and affirmed the decision of the CIT(A). (Judgment Date: September 13, 2013)

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Treatment of income from sale of shares as short term capital gain or business income.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai concerned the treatment of income from the sale of shares as short term capital gain or business income for the assessment year 2007-08. The Revenue challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the categorization of income amounting to Rs. 23,36,824. The assessee had offered this income as short term capital gain, while the Assessing Officer treated it as business income. The CIT(A) noted that in previous years, the short term capital gain offered by the assessee had been accepted by the AO. Relying on a Tribunal decision in a similar case, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee.

During the hearing, the AR of the assessee pointed out that the claim of short term capital gain had been accepted by the AO for both earlier and subsequent assessment years. The AR referred to a Tribunal decision in favor of the assessee's wife in a similar case. The DR, however, relied on the Assessing Officer's order. The Tribunal observed that the AO had consistently accepted the claim of short term capital gain on the sale of shares for previous and subsequent assessment years. It was noted that there was no evidence to show any difference in facts for the current assessment year to warrant a departure from the rule of consistency.

The Tribunal referred to a decision by a Co-ordinate Bench in a similar case involving the wife of the assessee, where the principle of consistency was emphasized. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) as no error or illegality was found in the order. Consequently, the appeal of the revenue was dismissed, and the impugned order of the CIT(A) was upheld. The judgment was pronounced on September 13, 2013.

---