Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether income arising from sale of listed shares was to be taxed as capital gains or business income, and whether the exclusion in the CBDT circular applied where the Revenue alleged price rigging but did not establish sham or bogus transactions.
Analysis: The Tribunal relied on CBDT Circular No. 6 of 2016, which was issued to reduce disputes on the character of share-sale income and accepts the assessee's declared treatment in specified situations. The circular preserves an exception only where the genuineness of the transaction itself is questionable, such as bogus capital gain claims or sham transactions. The record did not show that the transactions were sham; the Revenue's case rested mainly on suspicion and on perceived price fluctuations and trading patterns. In such circumstances, the exclusion clause did not apply and the assessee's treatment of the shares was required to be respected.
Conclusion: The income from sale of shares was correctly treated as capital gains and not business income. The Revenue's challenge failed.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed, and the assessee's characterization of the share-sale income was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the genuineness of listed share transactions is not shown to be questionable and the assessee consistently treats them as investments, the CBDT circular requires acceptance of capital gains treatment rather than reclassification as business income.