2014 (5) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stion of law arises for consideration: "Did the Tribunal fall into error in upsetting the findings of the assessing officer and CIT (Appeal) that the amount of Rs.55,05,471/- determined by the assessing officer as business income of the assessee was liable to be treated as short-term capital gain?" The assessee, an individual, declared a sum of Rs.79,65,790/- for A.Y. 2007-08 which included shor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pient of other sources of income and had never engaged in share transactions in the past. Consequently the solitary transaction could not be termed as her business income ? an expression which had wide connotations implying its continuance. It is contended by the revenue that the impugned order is in clear error because the Tribunal overlooked material findings of the CIT (Appeal) in respect of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... present transaction which yielded ? to a certain degree unnatural high levels of profit, the assessee was not engaged in any other share transaction so as to justify the finding that the amount in question was a business income. The CIT (Appeal) in his order very pertinently noted the following facts: - "i) The claim of the appellant that she had purchased shares (STT paid) in Oct. 2006 is not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t Ltd. vide transaction numbered 1016336. The sale of shares had taken place vide transaction numbered 1016574, 1016614 and 1016661 just after the purchase. The shares (STT paid) were sold within five days from the date of actual payment/ purchase and delivery. The holding therefore, is hardly for five days. The transactions detail Issued by the NSDL is enclosed here with as annexure-B. iii) This....