TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1625
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecision in the case of Sugarchand C. Shah 37 DTR 345 (Ahd.) wherein it was held that if shares are held for more than one month, it should be treated as short term capital gains and when share are held for less than one month, gain on them should be treated as business income. 2. The ld.CIT(A) ought to have accepted the contention of the appellant and treated the income from sale of shares as "long term capital gain" and/or short term capital gains, as returned." 3. At the time of hearing, the learned AR of the assessee submitted that he is not pressing this ground of appeal and made an endorsement to this effect in the grounds of appeal appended to Form no.36 by them before the Tribunal. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted agricultural operations. However, Shri Nilesh Shah, who was brother-in-law of the assessee, insisted on the assessee not to sell of all tankers, but to give all tankers to him for plying the same for his transportation business, and that is why all tankers from January, 2005 were given to brother-in-law of the assessee, Shri Nilesh Shah for running transportation business in his proprietary concern, Chandan Carriers. All tankers were lying in the plot of father of the assessee, M.H. Shah, who is having own proprietary firm, M/s.Shah Carriers for his transportation business. As all tankers lying in the plot of H.M. Shah, and due to his poor financial conditions, Shri Nilsh Shah has not given any rent to H.M. Shah. Shri Nilesh Shah is bro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ah, which is placed at page no.36 to 40 of the paper books, and submitted that the income of Rs. 1,07,890/- shown from the transport business by Shri Nilesh Shah has been assessed in his assessment year 2006-07 in an order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 31.10.2008. It was the argument that the same income cannot be assessed once in the hands of Shri Nilesh Shah and again in the hands of the assessee. He, therefore, prayed that the addition made should be deleted. 9. On the other hand, DR fully justified the orders of the lower authorities. 10. We have heard rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and material available on record. In the instant case, the AO made addition of Rs. 1,07,890/- being income from....