<?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 887 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260013</link>
    <description>Section 73 deems a company to be carrying on speculation business where its business consists of purchase and sale of shares, and the gross total income comparison is made on positive income components rather than by setting off share-trading loss. A share-trading loss cannot be used to defeat the statutory test where the company is otherwise not mainly covered by the excluded income categories. On the facts stated, the share-trading loss was treated as speculative loss, and the expenditure allocation against speculation income was upheld because the Assessing Officer&#039;s basis was disclosed and no infirmity in the apportionment was shown. The assessment treatment was sustained in full.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2015 06:03:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386264" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 887 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260013</link>
      <description>Section 73 deems a company to be carrying on speculation business where its business consists of purchase and sale of shares, and the gross total income comparison is made on positive income components rather than by setting off share-trading loss. A share-trading loss cannot be used to defeat the statutory test where the company is otherwise not mainly covered by the excluded income categories. On the facts stated, the share-trading loss was treated as speculative loss, and the expenditure allocation against speculation income was upheld because the Assessing Officer&#039;s basis was disclosed and no infirmity in the apportionment was shown. The assessment treatment was sustained in full.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>