Tribunal rules Short Term Capital Gain as business income vs. investment, distinguishing delivery-based transactions from speculation losses.

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the classification of Short Term Capital Gain as business income, emphasizing the intention behind the transactions and distinguishing between investment and trading. The Tribunal found that the gains should be treated as Short Term Capital Gains, as the transactions were delivery-based and not indicative of high-frequency trading. However, the Tribunal upheld the treatment of transactions of Swastick International as speculation losses due to the lack of evidence supporting actual delivery of goods.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of Short Term Capital Gain as business income.
2. Treatment of transactions of Swastick International as speculation losses.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Short Term Capital Gain as Business Income:

The assessee, a HUF engaged in real estate maintenance and trading of copper goods, filed a return declaring a total income of Rs. 2,46,74,220/- for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The AO noticed that the assessee had shown a Short Term Capital Gain of Rs. 2,23,34,990/- from share trading. The AO concluded that the assessee was engaged in the business of trading shares, thereby treating the Short Term Capital Gain as business income due to the high volume and short holding period of the transactions.

The assessee argued that the intention at the time of purchase was investment, not business, and all transactions were routed through banking channels and D-mat accounts. The AO's stance was supported by the Ld. DR, who emphasized the high volume and short holding period of the shares, arguing that they were not intended for investment.

The Tribunal, after considering various judicial decisions and the CBDT Circular No. 6/2016, noted that the assessee had purchased shares of six companies, doing one transaction every 61 days, which did not indicate high-frequency trading. The Supreme Court's decision in the case of Associated Industrial Development and P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan was cited, emphasizing the intention behind the transactions and the distinction between investment and trading.

The Tribunal found that the assessee had used its own funds, not borrowed funds, and all transactions were delivery-based through D-mat accounts. The Act itself provides that gains from shares held for less than 12 months are Short Term Capital Gains, and there was no adverse finding on the nature of the transactions. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the gains should be treated as Short Term Capital Gains, allowing ground no.1 in favor of the assessee.

2. Treatment of Transactions of Swastick International as Speculation Losses:

The AO observed that the assessee claimed a loss of Rs. 7,18,907/- from Copper Trade, where copper cathode/rods/wires were purchased and sold on the same date without actual delivery. The AO found no evidence of godowns being maintained by the assessee and concluded that the transactions were settled otherwise than by actual delivery, treating the loss as speculation loss under section 43(5) of the Act.

The assessee's counsel argued that the assessee earned commission from copper transactions but failed to provide direct evidence of actual delivery or godowns. The Tribunal noted the lack of evidence supporting the actual delivery of goods and upheld the AO's finding that the transactions were speculative in nature.

The Tribunal found no error in the Ld. CIT(A)'s findings and dismissed ground no.2, treating the losses as speculation losses.

Conclusion:

The appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the assessee on the classification of Short Term Capital Gain but upholding the treatment of copper transactions as speculation losses. The order was pronounced on 24/07/2019.

---