COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. HB STOCKHOLDING LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 945 / 2010HC Delhi27 July 20101 pages
For Petitioner: SANJEEV SABHARWAL
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court admitted the appeal on two substantial questions of law concerning the interpretation of Section 73 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its Explanation. The questions pertain to whether the nature of shareholding (investment or otherwise) and the actual delivery of shares impact the determination of profits or losses on their purchase and sale under Section 73. The court condoned a delay of 53 days in the refiling of the appeal. The judgment does not provide the Tribunal's decision on these issues, as it is at the stage of admitting the appeal for hearing. Therefore, no findings or reasoning on the merits of the case have been recorded, and no operative directions have been issued by the High Court at this juncture.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appellant) filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was filed with a delay of 53 days in refiling, for which an application for condonation was made. The Delhi High Court heard both the appellant's counsel, Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, and the respondent's counsel, Mr. S.K. Aggarwal. The court found sufficient cause for the delay and condoned it, disposing of the application. The appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the classification of shares as investment or otherwise by the assessee makes any difference to the profit or loss arising from their purchase and sale, in light of the deeming provisions of Section 73 read with the Explanation. 2. Whether profits or losses on transactions of purchase and sale of shares, irrespective of whether they were held as investment or otherwise, or whether actual delivery was taken, will make any difference in the interpretation of the provisions of Section 73 of the Act. Contentions: Assessee: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee at this stage of the proceedings. Revenue: The revenue, through its counsel, presented the appeal and argued the substantial questions of law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . ITA 945/2010 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate. . versus . HB STOCKHOLDING LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Aggarwal, Advocate. . CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN . . . O R D E R 27.07.2010 . C.M. No. 12673/2010 (Condonation of delay) . This is an application for condonation of delay of 53 days in refiling the appeal. We have heard Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Aggarwal, learned counsel for the respondent. Regard being had to the averments made in the application, we find sufficient cause for condonation of delay and accordingly, delay of 53 days in re-filing the appeal is condone. Accordingly, application stands disposed of. . . ITA 945/2010 page 1 of 2. . . ITA 945/2010 The present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ?Act?) is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- 5. Whether Assessee holding the shares as investment/otherwise will make any difference to the profit/loss arising on purchase/sale of shares in view of deeming provisions 73 read with Explanation? . 6. Whether profits/loss on transactions of purchase/sale of shares either held as investment/otherwise or actual delivery or not will make any difference in the interpretation provisions of Section 73 of the Act? . Issue notice. Mr. S.K. Aggarwal, learned counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent. No further notice need be issued. Filing of paper book stands dispensed with. . CHIEF JUSTICE . . . MANMOHAN, J JULY 27, 2010 js . . ITA 945/2010 page 2 of 2. . 2

More judgments on Section 73

All 521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 73 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →