TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 893
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) regarding the computation of capital gains? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in concurring with the CIT(A) that only the date of the first holding i.e. the date of acquisition of shares as stock in trade and not the subsequent period of holding as capital asset is to be accepted? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in ignoring the fact that for the computation of capital gains, the date of the transfer of an asset is important to distinguish between long term and short term capital assets for the purposes of taxat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ew than that taken earlier. If the above exercise has not been done in the appeal memo, it should be carried out by filing an affidavit before the appeal is heard for admission. However, inspite of our repeated requests, we find that the learned Counsel for the Revenue do not undertake this exercise. This exercise would not only expedite disposal but also ensure consistency and certainty. This is particularly so as if the appeal from the earlier order has been admitted/dismissed then the impugned order following the same would also require admission/dismissal. This would ensure consistency of approach and certainty of law to all concerned i.e. the officers of Revenue and the tax payers. We hope that henceforth the learned Counsel for the Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this case is identical to the issue which arose for the consideration before the Tribunal in Bright Star Investment (P) Ltd., (supra); (c) The learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue took time to find out whether or not any appeal has been filed in the case of Bright Star Investment (supra); (d) It was made clear that in case no appeal is filed to this Court in case of Bright Star Investment (supra), then the Officer concerned would file an affidavit. The affidavit of the Officer would indicate the reasons why the Revenue has chosen to file an appeal in this case when it merely follows its order in Bright Star Investment (supra) and no appeal therefrom has been filed; and (e) It was made clear that in case, no appeal is filed in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to, the learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue does not seek any further time to find out the exact position. However, he seeks to argue that the issues arising in Bright Star Investment (supra) is distinct/ different from that arising in this case. We pointed to him his statement as recorded in the earlier order dated 29th September, 2015 (dictated in Court) wherein he states that the issue in the two cases are identical. No explanation is offered for this volta face. Thus, we did not hear him on the above aspect, particularly when no affidavit is filed by the Officer of the department justifying the basis for the Revenue to take up a different stand from one taken by the Revenue in respect of the order of the Tribunal in Bright Star In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its appeal memo or by filing a separate affidavit. However, to our dismay, no action is taken by the Revenue as is evident from the attitude of the Revenue to our above directions in this case. In fact, copies of some of the earlier orders were communicated not only to the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax but also to the Central Board of Direct Taxes but to no avail. 9. We are conscious of the fact that where the order of the Tribunal make a reference to an earlier order and thereafter on interpretation applies it to the facts of the case before it, then an affidavit need not be filed. In such cases, the Counsel could make submission why the decision would not apply. However, where the impugned order of the Tribunal relies upon its earli....