Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Mere use of borrowed funds or the volume of share transactions did not change the character of shareholdings into stock-in-trade where the assessee consistently treated listed shares as investments and held them for more than 12 months. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that intention, consistency in treatment, and the surrounding facts govern classification of share transaction income. As the Assessing Officer relied only on the alleged flow of borrowed funds and did not make an objective analysis of frequency, holding period, intention at purchase, or book treatment, the gains were correctly assessed as capital gains. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) and treated both long-term and short-term gains as capital gains, not business income.
Mere use of borrowed funds or the volume of share transactions did not change the character of shareholdings into stock-in-trade where the assessee consistently treated listed shares as investments and held them for more than 12 months. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that intention, consistency in treatment, and the surrounding facts govern classification of share transaction income. As the Assessing Officer relied only on the alleged flow of borrowed funds and did not make an objective analysis of frequency, holding period, intention at purchase, or book treatment, the gains were correctly assessed as capital gains. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) and treated both long-term and short-term gains as capital gains, not business income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
