1984 (2) TMI 16

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stion referred to us for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 is as follows : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of section 47(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " Although the question raised is a very substantial one, we feel that it is not really necessary to answer this question....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... year 1965-66 and Rs. 5,55,686 for the assessment year 1966-67. He held that the " capital gains " were Rs. 1,94,072 for the first year and Rs. 4,13,566 for the second year. It may be mentioned that the profit had been shown by the assessee company on the basis that it was a dealer in shares. The Income-tax Officer had in fact followed an earlier decision of the Tribunal whereby the assessee was t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellate Assistant Commissioner held that the profits were assessable under the head "Capital gains " and not under the head " Income from business ". However, following the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of K. P. Varghese v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 719, it was held that section 52 could not be invoked and, hence, the additions made by the Income-tax Officer were deleted. On appeal to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....question referred to us. However, it has also been brought to our notice that the Full Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court has been reversed by the Supreme Court as per its judgment in K. P. Varghese v. ITO[1981] 131 ITR 597. This means that the view of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to the effect that section 52(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be invoked in this case has to be up....