https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446583 ITAT Chennai partially upheld CIT's revision order under section 263. The tribunal confirmed CIT's jurisdiction regarding disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D and deduction under section 35D, as assessee's counsel agreed these issues were valid. However, ITAT rejected CIT's revision on classification of share trading profits, holding that assessee correctly declared profits as short-term capital gains rather than business income. The tribunal found assessee maintained separate portfolios for investment and trading with clear demarcation in books, complying with CBDT Circular 4/2007. CIT's assumption of jurisdiction failed on share classification issue as assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interest. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Dec 2023 07:18:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446583 ITAT Chennai partially upheld CIT's revision order under section 263. The tribunal confirmed CIT's jurisdiction regarding disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D and deduction under section 35D, as assessee's counsel agreed these issues were valid. However, ITAT rejected CIT's revision on classification of share trading profits, holding that assessee correctly declared profits as short-term capital gains rather than business income. The tribunal found assessee maintained separate portfolios for investment and trading with clear demarcation in books, complying with CBDT Circular 4/2007. CIT's assumption of jurisdiction failed on share classification issue as assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interest. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446583