TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 537
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n record are as under. 3. Assessee is an individual stated to be deriving income from salary, business, capital gains and other sources. Assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. A.Y. 2008-09 on 06.10.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 3,31,270/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide order dated 01.11.2010 and the total income was determined at Rs. 47,52,420/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 19.10.2011 granted partial relief to the Assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of ld. CIT(A), Assessee and Revenue are now in appeal before us. The grounds raised by the Revenue reads as under:- 1. The Ld. Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns made in A.Y. 2007-08 in appeal no. CIT(A)-XI/959/9-10 dated 19-11 -2010 are reproduced as under: "4.2 I have considered the submissions made by the A.R. of the appellant and the observations of the assessing officer in the assessment order. I find sufficient force in the arguments of the appellant. She has been able to meet the observations of the A.O. point by point. The facts of the appellant maintaining separate sets of books - for trading in shares and for investment in shares; her investing own funds for the purpose; receipt of dividend income of Rs. 28,25,193/- during the year and her not selling even a single share within 30 days of its purchase weigh in appellant's favour. The case laws relief on by the A.O. are distinguis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (5) All the share transacted were registered in the name of the appellant. Thus as per the ratio of decision of Gopal Purohit v/s. JCIT (2009) 29 SOT Mumbai, she will be treated as investor in respect of these investments. 3.5 With these observations, I direct the A.O. to assess income declared by the appellant as Short Term Capital Gain and Long Term Capital Gain as the case may be. These grounds of appeals are allowed. 6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of ld. CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 7. Before us, the ld. D.R. supported the order of A.O. He also placed reliance on the decision in the case of Manojkumar Samdaria vs. CIT reported in 2014 52 Taxman.com 247 (SC). On the other hand ld. A.R. reiterated the submiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he present case. He thus supported the order of ld. CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find while holding the gains on sale of shares to be capital gains, ld. CIT(A) has given a finding that the facts of the case in the year under appeal are identical to that of A.Y. 05-06 & 07-08 and further during the year under appeal the number of transactions are small, the shares were purchased for investment purpose and were not made out to borrowed funds. Before us, Revenue has not brought any material to controvert the findings of ld. CIT(A). We further find that against the order of Tribunal, the matter was carried by Revenue before Hon'ble High Court and the appeal of Revenue was dismissed by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant has made very general submission. The appellant has failed to prove with documentary evidences that borrowed money was not utilized for the purpose of investment in stock/mutual funds. The assessee's submission that it has not incurred any expenditure in relation to the income which does not form part of the total income under this Act is not accepted in view of the provisions of section 14A(3) of the IT. Act. As per the provisions of section 14A(3) of the IT. Act, the provisions of section 14A(2) also apply in relation to a case where assessee claims that no expenditure been incurred by him in relation to income which does not form part of the income under this Act. The appellant is also claiming that no expenditure been inc....