Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश /O R D E R
Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The captioned appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2011-12 contest the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-44 Rajesh D. Nandu (HUF) Assessment Year: 2011-12 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No.CIT(A)-44/ACIT 32(2)/ITA-65/14-15 dated 30/09/2016. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-25(2), Mumbai [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 on 24/03/2014 wherein the income of the assessee has been determined at Rs.12.62 Lacs after certain adjustments. The only dispute under the appeal is head of income under which Gain/Loss on share transactions would be assessable.
During assessment proceedings, it was noted that the assessee earned Long term capital gain [LTCG] on shares for Rs.274.60 Lacs and suffered Short term capital loss for Rs.107.67 Lacs. The LTCG was claimed exempt under the provisions of the act. These transactions, in the opinion of Ld. AO, were assessable as business income. Resultantly the net gain of Rs.166.92 Lacs was added to the income of the assessee.
Aggrieved, the assessee contested the same before the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 30/09/2016 where the Ld. CIT(A) relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2010-11 allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us.
The Ld. Departmental Representative supported the stand of the Ld. AO whereas the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the issue squarely stood in assessee’s own case by the decision of the Tribunal for AY 2010-11.
Rajesh D. Nandu (HUF) Assessment Year: 2011-12 5. We have carefully perused the rival contentions and order of the Tribunal dated 02/03/2016 for AY 2010-11 where the appeal of the assessee has been allowed on similar issue. Since a view has already been taken by the Tribunal and Ld. CIT (A) has relied upon the same, our interference in the matter is not required. 6. Resultantly revenue’s appeal stand dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd March , 2018.