2019 (7) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A' Bench (for brevity, "the Tribunal"), dated 07.05.2008, in I.T.A.No.708(Mds)/2005 for the assessment year 2001-02. 2.The above appeal has been admitted on 05.01.2009, on the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in rejecting the consistent method of valuation of shares at cost or market price whichever is less and disallowing the corresponding loss? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal failed to appreciate that it is the intention of the appellant and the manner in which the investment is held that determines the character as to whether it is a long term investment or stock in trade? ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n, it cannot be an allowable deduction for the purpose of computing his profit." 5.From the above, it is seen that the assessee had shown the shares as investment in the books of account and there was no trading activities. Consequently, the Assessing Officer held that it cannot be allowed as deduction for the purpose of computing the profit of the assessee. 6.The assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-VI, Chennai (for brevity, "The CIT(A)"), in I.T.A.No.82/04-05. The said appeal was dismissed by order dated 13.12.2004. The following factual finding was recorded by the CIT(A) to dismiss the assessee's appeal. "4.2.3..............From the details filed by the appellant it is seen that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the High Court of Karnataka in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd., vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2013) 356 ITR 0549 (Karnataka). 9.Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior Standing appearing for the Revenue submitted that the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) have thoroughly examined the facts and have specifically recorded that no record was placed by the assessee to show that the shares are stockin- trade. This factual finding was affirmed by the Tribunal. Further, it was pointed out that the orders passed by the Tribunal, dated 05.02.2010 and 08.12.2017, are factually distinguishable and has drawn the attention of this Court to the reasons assigned by the Tribunal therein. In ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee because, in the said case, it was found that the assessee maintained accounts in terms of the Reserve Bank of India Regulations and he has shown it as investment, consistently, for more than two decades, it has been shown as stock in-trade and depreciation has been claimed and allowed. Therefore, the Court held that notwithstanding that in the balance sheet, it is shown as investment for the purpose of Income-tax Act, it is shown as stock-in-trade. On the facts and circumstances of the said case, the Court rendered such finding whereas, in the instant case, there is absolutely no record placed by the assessee either before the Assessing Officer or before the CIT(A) or before the Tribunal to substantiate her stand. Therefore, the de....