Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court rules transactions as speculative, disallows loss claim in share sales</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus VACHANBAND INVESTMENT LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus VACHANBAND INVESTMENT LTD. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Whether the loss declared by the assessee from the sale of shares of M/s J.P. Industries and Himachal Futuristic Company Ltd. could be treated as speculation loss.2. The genuineness of the transactions involving the sale and purchase of shares.3. The relevance of the relationship between the assessee and M/s A. Nitin Capital Services.4. The applicability of Section 43(5) and Section 73 of the Income Tax Act to the transactions in question.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Speculation Loss Treatment:The primary issue was whether the loss declared by the assessee from the sale of shares of M/s J.P. Industries and Himachal Futuristic Company Ltd. could be treated as speculation loss. The Tribunal initially found that the transactions were genuine and that the loss could be set off against the profit available. However, the Revenue contended that the transactions were sham and aimed at maneuvering a loss through book entries. The AO and CIT (A) treated the transactions as speculative, citing the lack of evidence for actual delivery of shares and the nature of the transactions.2. Genuineness of Transactions:The AO scrutinized the transactions and found several discrepancies, such as the lack of serial numbers on bills and no evidence of actual delivery of shares. The assessee's argument that the transactions were genuine due to the market prices being close to the sale prices was rejected by the AO and CIT (A). The Tribunal, however, was influenced by the acceptance of similar transactions in the hands of M/s A. Nitin Capital Services, leading it to rule in favor of the assessee. The High Court, however, found that the Tribunal's reasoning was too broad and that the lack of evidence and the nature of the transactions indicated they were not genuine.3. Relationship Between Assessee and M/s A. Nitin Capital Services:The Revenue argued that the close family connection between the assessee and M/s A. Nitin Capital Services suggested that the transactions were not normal business transactions but were aimed at creating losses to reduce profit. The Tribunal's reliance on the acceptance of M/s A. Nitin Capital Services' claims was found to be insufficient by the High Court, which noted that the assessment details of M/s A. Nitin Capital Services were not clear and that the representative had not cooperated fully.4. Applicability of Section 43(5) and Section 73:The AO treated the loss from the sale of shares of Himachal Futuristic Company Ltd. as speculative under Section 43(5) and Section 73 of the Income Tax Act, as the transactions were settled by difference. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, but the High Court found that the facts and circumstances indicated that the transactions were speculative and not genuine, thus supporting the AO's and CIT (A)'s findings.Conclusion:The High Court restored the AO's order, as modified by the CIT (A), and answered the substantial question of law in favor of the Revenue. The appeal was allowed to the extent that the transactions were found to be speculative and not genuine, thus disallowing the loss claimed by the assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found