TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2746
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 11,95,283/- on 31.10.2006. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had shown income under the head 'short term capital gain' amounting to Rs. 10,99,268/- and under the head 'Long Term Capital Gain' amounting to Rs. 20,133/- on account of sale and purchase of shares. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the sale and purchase of shares was regular business of the assessee. Therefore, the income from the same was liable to be assessed under the head 'income from business and profession' and not under the head 'short term capital gain'. When confronted, the assessee submitted that he was not a trader in shares but had made investments in shares. It was also submitted that she had invested in only....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to prove that her intention was to earn dividend, which she had not proved. vi) The assessee has spent a lot of time, energy and application of mind in studying the possible ups and downs in large number of scrips. vii) The assessee has dealt in purchase and sale of shares throughout the year. Therefore, it is a regular business activity of the assessee. viii) If the shares were not held as stock-in-trade but as an investment, then they could not be valued at cost or realizable value, whichever is lower as done by the assessee. 3. Before the learned CIT (Appeals), the assessee submitted that she had made investment in shares and mutual funds from time to time with clear intention of treating the same as investment. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ither of small quantity, nor of small amount. It was further observed that the assessee had not been able to controvert any of the facts analyzed by the Assessing Officer, nor she has been able to controvert the reasons given by the Assessing Officer towards his decision. In this view, he upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in holding that the shares were held by the assessee as stock-in trade and she was carrying out the business of sale and purchase of shares. 5. Aggrieved by this order of the learned CIT (Appeals), the assessee has come up in appeal before us raising as many as six grounds of appeal. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing before us argued that the assessee has made investment in share....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....business transaction. Reliance was placed on a number of judgments of various High Courts and Benches of the Tribunal. It was also brought to our notice that the assessee has been treating the transactions relating to sale and purchase of shares as investment in the last many years and no dispute is arising with the Department on this issue. In view of these submissions, it was prayed that the transactions of sale and purchase of shares be held to be relating to investment and not for the purpose of any business income. 7. The learned D.R. relied upon on the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as of the learned CIT (Appeals). 8. We have heard the learned representatives of both the parties, perused the findings of the authorities ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee is maintaining separate set of books for her business of knitted cloths. The transaction entered into by the assessee with respect to derivative and commodity have also been treated by her as her business activities. Only the transactions relating to sale and purchase of shares on delivery basis are treated as investment by the assessee. From the perusal of page 23 of the Paper Book, it is seen that the trading account on account of long term and short term sale and purchase of share have been maintained separately while that relating to commodity and derivative have been maintained separately. The income/loss of trading on commodity and derivative have been added in the Profit & Loss Account relating to business and income from t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 28 transactions which were done with the span of 15 days and there were around 50 transactions which were held within a span of more than 180 days. There was no intra-day transaction. iii) As per the Assessing Officer, the assessee has received only an amount of Rs. 12,825/- as dividend during the year. As per our understanding, the amount of dividend received during the year cannot be the one of the criteria for deciding the issue. iv) As regards the analysis of the Assessing Officer that the assessee is holding a share for four months only. This analysis made by the Assessing Officer is not relevant and also not appropriate to decide the issue concluding that no company declare dividend every three months is a very weir....