ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 10(1), CHENNAI vs. DR.M.R.GIRINATH, CHENNAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection. The assessee's counsel withdrew the cross-objection, and the Revenue's appeal was considered within the monetary limit.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer reclassified the assessee's share and derivatives trading income from capital gains to business income and made a disallowance under Section 14A. The CIT(A) directed the AO to treat the transactions as capital gains and reduced the Section 14A disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's share and derivatives trading should be treated as capital gains or business income, and the quantum of disallowance under Section 14A.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश/ O R D E R
PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Chennai in dated
:-2-: & CO No: 39/Chny/2018 28.09.2017 for assessment year 2012-13, while the assessee filed the CO for the same assessment year.
Shri. M.R. Girinath, the assessee, is a medical practitioner. While completing the assessment for assessment year 2012-13, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee was trading in large volumes of shares and other derivatives. After giving adequate opportunity to the assessee, the AO assessed the income returned by the assessee under the head “capital gains” under the head “business income”. Further, he made disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to treat the transactions in shares under head “capital gains” and restricted the 14A disallowance from Rs. 8,50,871/- to Rs. 4,64,074/-.
Aggrieved, the Revenue filed the above appeal and the assessee filed the CO. At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR submitted that the appeal is falling within the monetary limit as per the CBDT circular and the Ld. AR also withdrew the CO. In the facts and circumstances, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed.
:-3-: & CO No: 39/Chny/2018 4. In the result, the Revenue’s appeal and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06th August, 2018 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026