<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (4) TMI 682 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246246</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, affirming that income from the sale of shares should be classified as capital gains rather than business income. The court found that the assessments made by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal were well-founded, considering factors such as the nature of transactions, intention behind holding shares, and absence of separate accounts for investments and trading activities. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the court ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding that the income in question was rightly categorized as capital gains.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352782" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 682 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246246</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, affirming that income from the sale of shares should be classified as capital gains rather than business income. The court found that the assessments made by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal were well-founded, considering factors such as the nature of transactions, intention behind holding shares, and absence of separate accounts for investments and trading activities. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the court ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding that the income in question was rightly categorized as capital gains.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>