Trading intention key in determining shares as stock in trade. Appeal dismissed, no costs.

The Tribunal found that the appellant's repeated trading of shares was indicative of a trading intention for quick profits rather than capital gains. The Tribunal's decision, based on evaluating the facts of each case, determined that the shares were held as stock in trade. Both the Commissioner and the Tribunal agreed on this factual finding, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs as no substantial question of law arose.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether trading in shares amounts to short term and long term capital gains or is considered as stock in trade.

Analysis:
The appellant argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in categorizing trading in shares as capital gains, emphasizing that the repeated trading of five scripts resulted in quick profits, not capital gains. The appellant's motive was deemed to be earning quick profits rather than dividends, indicating a trading intention. The Tribunal allegedly overlooked the Assessing Officer's reasoning. On the other hand, the respondent contended that the Assessing Officer's observation of repeated trading was flawed, with the Tribunal finding no repetition in the transactions. The Tribunal's decision was based on evaluating each case's facts to determine whether share transactions constitute capital gains or stock in trade.

The Tribunal referenced judgments by the Apex Court to establish that determining whether a transaction is an adventure in the nature of trade requires a case-specific evaluation. The absence of evidence indicating the appellant churned the same shares supported the conclusion that the shares were held as stock in trade. Both the Commissioner and the Tribunal concurred on this factual finding, which was not deemed perverse based on the evidence. Consequently, it was concluded that no substantial question of law arose, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs.

---