TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1421
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming that the gain of Rs. 63,17,841/- from sales of shares was business profit and not short term capital gain; 2.1 That the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming that the gains on shares sold within :r the period of 30 days of their acquisitions were business profit instead of short term capital gains; 2.2 That the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming that the Appellant had been carrying of on the business of dealing in shares. He failed to appreciate that the shares were purchased to make investments and the Appellant had no intention to carry on the business of dealing shares; 3. That the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 40,000/-under Section 14A of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to mobile components etc. The appellant filed its return of income on 31st of March 2008 declaring nil income. The assessment was made by the Ld. AO vide assessment order dated 30/11/2009 determining the total income of the assessee of Rs. 6382746/- . During the year the assessee has earned profit of Rs. 6382746/- on sale of shares which were shown by the assessee as capital gain on sale of those shares according to the period of holding of the shares. The Ld. assessing officer took the view that the appellant was carrying on the business of dealing in shares and therefore such profit is chargeable to tax as business income of the assessee and not be capital gain as claimed by the appellant. The appellant has earned dividend income of Rs. 8....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal of the assessee are dismissed. 5. Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is against the confirmation of the gain on sale of share of Rs. 6 317841/- from sale of shares as business profit and not short term capital gain as offered by the assessee in its computation of total income. This ground of the appeal of the assessee was further extended contesting that gain on shares sold within the period of 30 days of their acquisitions were not business profit but short-term capital gain as offered by the assessee. It is further contended that assessee is carrying on the investment in shares without any intention to earn business income out of those shares. The Ld. assessing officer was of the view that though the assessee has mentioned t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng he stated that even if the shares are held for less than 30 days as has been stated at page No. 3 of the assessment order, it cannot be held to be the business income of the assessee. For this purpose, he relied on the order of the Ld. CIT appeal dated 26/07/2013 wherein at page No. 20 of the order of the Ld. CIT appeal in the assessee's own case, it is been held relying upon the decision of M/s Dreamland buildtech private limited that capital gain or loss, on account of share transaction if the period of holding a less than 30 day shall be considered as business income. With respect to the other transaction it is been held that the assessee's income from sale of shares shall be chargeable to tax as capital gain. He further submitted tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....731272/- and in other scripts there are minor profits or losses and further the assessee has also earned the long-term capital gain of Rs. 64905/-. On appreciation of the about transactions, The Ld. CIT appeal has held that the Scripts, which are held for less than 30 days, shall be chargeable to tax under the head business income relying on the decision of the Dreamland buildTech private limited. Subsequently, in that particular case assessee preferred appeal before the coordinate bench and vide order dated 12/12/2014 wide page No. 15 para No. 8.3 of the order of the appeal of the assessee was allowed and it was held that the entire profits from the purchases and sales of shares said to be assessed under capital gain, even though they are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee in appeal before us. 10. Before us, the Ld. authorised representative submitted that that assessee has incurred expenditure of Rs. 63,000 of fees and taxes, bank charges of Rs. 14991/-and audit fee of Rs. 5618/-. He submitted that the above expenditure incurred for the purpose of the business of the assessee and to maintain the corporate identity of the assessee, but not for the earning of the exempt income. He further submitted that that the Ld. CIT appeal has sustained the disallowance of Rs. 40,000 without any basis and he further submitted that there is no satisfaction recorded by the assessing officer about the claim of the assessee about the claim of appellant that there is there is no expenditure, which is incurred for ear....