2018 (1) TMI 1778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... i/b Jitendra Singh PC :- 1. This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 6 February 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order dated 6 February 2015 is in respect of Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Revenue urges the following reframed question of law for our consideration: "(a) Whether ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s activity except dealing in shares. Thus by Assessment order dated 22 December 2003 held that the Respondent is a trader in shares and the gain made on sale of shares should be charged to tax under the head profits or gains in business and not under the head capital gains. 4. Being aggrieved, the Respondent - Assessee preferred an Appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). By....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of Rs.1.88 Crores was receivable by her. On the aforesaid facts the CIT (A) allowed the Appeal of the Respondent - Assessee and held that the Respondent to be an investor in shares. 5. Being aggrieved, the Revenue carried the issue in appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order the Tribunal on consideration of the facts upheld the view of the CIT (A). Moreover it also records the fact that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the contrary, it found sums were receivable by the Respondent from M/s. H.G. Hawa and Co. to the extent of Rs. 1.88 Crores on account of loans extended by the Respondent to the M/s. H.G. Hawa and Co. Further this finding of fact has also been found to be correct by the Tribunal in the impugned order. 8. Thus the only grievance articulated on behalf of the Revenue in on an issue of fact and it ....