TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 776
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d are decided by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience the facts are extracted from the appeal of assessee in ITA No.6797/M/2018 for assessment year 2011-12. 3. Shri Ashok Patil appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in investment and trading of shares and future and options. During the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee apart from incomes assessable under others head of income has earned capital gains (short/long term capital gains) on sale of shares. The assessee has also earned interest income and dividend income. In the return of income for AY 2011-12, the assessee has declared short term capital gain of Rs. 15,50, 041/- from sale of shares. In scrutiny ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts in the impugned assessment year are identical. Thus, the issue raised by the assessee in ground No.1 of the appeal is squarely covered by the decisions of Tribunal in assessee's own case. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in ground No.2 of appeal the assessee has assailed disallowance made under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') r.w.r 8D(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short 'the Rules'). The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that during the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 4,21,195/-. No suo-motu disallowance was made by the assessee in respect of exempt income earned. The Assessing Officer invoking the provisos of Rule....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... term capital gains is 238, whereas in assessment year 2006-07 the number of transactions were 363. The Tribunal after examining the entire facts held that the transactions were carried on account of capital investments. The ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that by no stretch to imagination the frequency of sale and purchases of share transactions is high looking at the size of assessee's portfolio. He referred to investments reflected in the balance sheet consisting of 197 quoted shares at the end of the year. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further referred to CBDT Circular No.4 of 2007 dated 16/06/2007 to contend that the assessee can have two portfolios one comprising of securities, which are to be treated as capita....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee's ground on similar set of facts where the frequency of transactions were more than 360. Thereafter, in assessment years 2008-09, 2012-13 and 2014-15 similar issue had come up before the Tribunal where the Assessing Officer had changed the head of income in respect of income earned by the assessee from sale of shares. The assessee offered the income as 'short term capital gains' and the Assessing Officer treated the same as 'business income'. The Tribunal decided the issue in each of the aforesaid assessment years by following the order of Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.2285/Mum/2010 for assessment year 2006-07(supra). The Tribunal accepted assessee's plea that the income from sale of shares has rightly been disclosed under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee is without any merit, hence, dismissed. 11. In ground No.4 of appeal, the assessee has assailed initiation of penalty proceeding under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Challenge to penalty proceedings at this stage is premature, ergo, the ground No.4 is dismissed as such. 12. In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed. ITA No.156/Mum/2019 (A.Y.2015-16): 13. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted at the outset that the grounds raised by the assessee are identical to the grounds raised in assessment year 2011-12. The submissions made while addressing the grounds in assessment year 2011-12 would equally apply to the grounds raised in assessment year 2015-16. The ld. Counsel pointed that the issue of disa....