TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The primary issue in the revenue's appeal is whether the income from the sale of shares amounting to Rs. 67,87,654/- should be classified as short-term capital gain or business income. The CIT (A) held that the income was correctly declared as short-term capital gain by the assessee, while the Assessing Officer (AO) classified it as business income.
The CIT (A) granted relief by noting that the assessee provided complete transaction details, showing a total income of Rs. 1,87,37,259/- under three heads: business income (Rs. 4,29,169/-), long-term capital gain (Rs. 1,09,41,612/-), and short-term capital gain (Rs. 67,87,654/-). The assessee also earned dividend income, claimed as exempt. The AO argued that the assessee was trading in shares regularly, but the assessee distinguished between shares held as investment and stock in trade, relying on CBDT Instruction No.1827. The CIT (A) found that the shares were valued at cost price, indicating they were treated as capital assets, not stock in trade. The assessee did not engage in intra-day trading and earned substantial dividend income, supporting the claim that shares were held as investments. The average holding period of shares varied between 4 to 12 months, further supporting the investment intent.
The revenue's representative argued that the company's main objects included acting as stock and share brokers, and the frequent transactions indicated trading activity. However, the assessee's representative countered that the company surrendered its NSE Ticket in May 2001 and primarily derived income from capital gains, interest, and dividends since then. The shares were held as investments, valued at cost, and reflected as such in the balance sheet. The assessee's representative cited several case laws supporting the classification of shares as investments.
The Tribunal noted the distinction between shares held as investment and stock in trade, emphasizing the treatment in the books of account. The shares were valued at cost, not at the lower of cost or market price, indicating they were investments. However, the Tribunal also considered the frequency and volume of transactions, suggesting a profit motive. The total dividend income was Rs. 9,45,281/-, but it was unclear if this was from the shares sold for short-term capital gain. The Tribunal deemed it necessary to verify the source of dividend income to determine the true character of the shares. The issue was restored to the AO for verification.
In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the revenue's appeal, directing the AO to verify the source of dividend income and the nature of transactions to ascertain if the shares were held as investments or trading assets.
Order pronounced in open court on this 13th day of July, 2012.
TaxTMI 
