TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 878
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 23.01.2008, for the assessment year 2001-02. 2. Though they were two proceedings before the Tribunal, one at the instance of the Revenue, which was the substantive appeal and other proceeding was Cross-Objection by the assessee. However, no orders were passed in the Cross-Objection, since the Cross- Objection was filed only to sustain the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CITA), which held in favour of the assessee. Therefore, though there are two tax case appeals, the issue is one and the same. 3. The above appeals have been admitted on the following Substantial questions of law: (i). Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in concluding that the loss incurred from the transactions relating to the m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee and held that it is a revenue loss. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed by the impugned order. 6. The short question would be whether there was evidence available on record to indicate that the intention of the assessee was to treat the holding as stock-in-trade. If such records were available and the intention was clear, then the assessee's case would be squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Investment Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax [(1970) 77 ITR 533 (SC)]. In the said case also, the facts were more or less similar and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows: "As o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny was allowed a loss of "Rs.26,078/- resulting from redemption of securities". In the assessment year 1955-56 the company was allowed a loss of Rs. 2,675/- resulting from the sale of shares." 7. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no evidence available to indicate that the intention of the assessee was to treat the holding as stock-in-trade. To consider the same whether there was any factual evidence given by the assessee in this regard, we turn back to the assessment order dated 05.03.2004, where the Assessing Officer has extracted the written submission made by the assessee. On a perusal of the same, it is clear that the assessee has stated that they are a financial service company rendering financial advisory and syndi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment years, similar transactions have been held to be revenue in nature and for the assessment year 2006-07, the Assessing Officer did not agree with the assessee. Consequently, an appeal was filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), after taking into consideration of the Memorandum of Association of the Company, held that the assessee had acquired equity shares, which it held as stock-in-trade and out of which, a portion was sold incurring a loss which was accounted for as business loss. Further, it held that the method of accounting and the principle of accounting for loss or gains from investments or stock-in-trade have been consistently and regularly followed by the assessee and ac....