<?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>2015 (5) TMI 616 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259742</link>
    <description>Profit from sale of shares held through a portfolio management scheme was treated as capital gains because the shares were retained as investments, and the assessee did not maintain its own trading infrastructure or personnel; the use of a professionally managed scheme was only a method of prudent investment and did not convert the activity into business. Borrowed funds used to acquire shares likewise did not alter the capital character of the investment, since borrowing by itself does not establish trading activity. The Tribunal&#039;s view that the transactions remained capital in nature was upheld, and no substantial question of law was found to arise.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2015 07:56:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 616 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259742</link>
      <description>Profit from sale of shares held through a portfolio management scheme was treated as capital gains because the shares were retained as investments, and the assessee did not maintain its own trading infrastructure or personnel; the use of a professionally managed scheme was only a method of prudent investment and did not convert the activity into business. Borrowed funds used to acquire shares likewise did not alter the capital character of the investment, since borrowing by itself does not establish trading activity. The Tribunal&#039;s view that the transactions remained capital in nature was upheld, and no substantial question of law was found to arise.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259742</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>