CIT v. Gopal Purohit

336 ITR 287High Court2011#334 most cited

What is CIT v. Gopal Purohit authority for?

The gain from delivery-based share transactions, where shares are consistently treated as investments and valued at cost in the books, is assessable as capital gains and not business income. An assessee's consistent stand on classifying share transactions should generally be followed by the assessing officer in subsequent years.

254

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gopal Purohit · Section 10(38) · Section 14A · Section 143(3) · share transactions · capital gains · business income · investment or stock-in-trade · consistency · Supreme Court SLP dismissed

Also reported as

228 CTR 582188 Taxmann 14034 DTR 52

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68Section 10(34)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

long term capital gainsection 14asection 10previous yeartransfercompanysection 143businessindiaprescribedsection 143(3)total income

Judgments citing CIT v. Gopal Purohit

Kalpak Builders, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5281/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amit Shuklaआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.5281/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Kalpak Builders, Acit 19(3), Kalpak House, 128 Turner Road, 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050 Vs Mumbai-12 Pan:Aadfk1518J िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Sathe िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By :Shri M.Murli सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing :08- 03 -2016 सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement :16-03-2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)-30,Mumbai, Dated 6.6.2014,The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Firm,Engaged In The Business Of Builders & Financial Services,Filed Its Return Of Income On 23.09. 2010, Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 14,08, 886/-.The Assessing Officer (Ao) Finalised The Assessment On 13.03.2013, Under Section 143 (3) Of The Act, Determin -Ing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 44, 66, 480/-.

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti SatheFor Respondent: Shri M.Murli
Section 143Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, ए खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - A BENCH सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अिमत शु"ल "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amit Shukla,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.5281/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Kalpak Builders, ACIT 19(3), Kalpak House, 128 Turner Road, 3rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050 Vs Mumbai-12 PAN:AADFK1518J िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/…

D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S A.K.G Finvest Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1341/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 45Section 73

…d i.e. either little less than one year or more than one year are assessable as short term capital gain/loss or long term capital gain/loss and not business income. Similar view is taken by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit (2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.), wherein it has been held as under: “Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that it was open to the assessee to maintain two separate portfolios, one relating to investment and another relating to business of dealing in shares, that a finding of fact had been arrived at by the Tribunal as regards the two distinct types of transactions, namely,…

I.T.O WD - 44(4), Kolkata vs. Sri Sailesh Jalan, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1880/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sallong Yoden, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Mahendra Agarwala, FCA
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)

…nd other factors which are missing in the case of appellant. It is further seen that the Appellant's case is squarely covered by the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Rohit Anand 327 ITR 445 and the Bombay High Court in CIT 25 Mumbai Vs. Gopal Purohit in 228 CTR 582 which was subsequently upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by dismissing the SLP filed by the Department. It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court in the above decision that - "The Tribunal has observed in its judgment that the assessee has followed a consistent practice in regard to the nature of the activities, the manner of keeping records…

Auto Finance Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 12(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4458/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2016AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)

…income therefrom was declared and assessed under the head long term capital gains or short term capital gains, as the case may be, after due verification and passing a order u/s 143(3) of the Act. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Gopal Purohit 336 ITR 287 against which the SLP was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The ld. DR, Shri Yogesh kamat, on the other hand, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order. 3.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee firm is engaged in the investment in shar…

ACIT Cir 1, Thane vs. Edenred (India) P.Ltd, Thane

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee company and Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3966/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Edenred (India) Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Income Tax – Circle I V. Accor Services Pvt. Ltd.) Asher It Park, Camera House, 6 Th Floor, Wagle Estate, Majiwade Village Rd., Thane – 400 604 Thane – 400 601 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadca 0307 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan (DR)

…ofits , relying on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Woodward Governor India Private Limited (2009) 21 DTR 106(SC) and CIT v. Gopal Purohit (2011) 7 ITA 2952/Mum/2014 & ITA 3966/Mum/2014 Assessment Year 2008-09 Edenred (India) Pvt. Ltd. 336 ITR 287(Bom.) . The assessee company submitted copies of assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2005-06 to 2007-08 and assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11 wherein system of accounting followed by the assessee company has been accepted by the AO and pleaded that system of accounting followed by the assessee company consistently…

Edenred (India) P. Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir I, Thane

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee company and Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2952/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Edenred (India) Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Income Tax – Circle I V. Accor Services Pvt. Ltd.) Asher It Park, Camera House, 6 Th Floor, Wagle Estate, Majiwade Village Rd., Thane – 400 604 Thane – 400 601 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadca 0307 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan (DR)

…ofits , relying on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Woodward Governor India Private Limited (2009) 21 DTR 106(SC) and CIT v. Gopal Purohit (2011) 7 ITA 2952/Mum/2014 & ITA 3966/Mum/2014 Assessment Year 2008-09 Edenred (India) Pvt. Ltd. 336 ITR 287(Bom.) . The assessee company submitted copies of assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2005-06 to 2007-08 and assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11 wherein system of accounting followed by the assessee company has been accepted by the AO and pleaded that system of accounting followed by the assessee company consistently…

Haresh Madhavji Hindocha, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(1), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5108/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh.B.R. Baskaran & Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.5108/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 Haresh Madhavji Hindocha Dy. Cit-22(1) 4Th Floor, Tower 6 8, Rishabhdev Vallabh Baug Lane Exim Vs Vashi Rly Station, Station Bldg. Ghatkopar (E) Vashi, Mumbai-400 077. Navi Mumbai-400 703. Pan: Aawph 1212 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya-Ar राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandra Vijay-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.02.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 23-02-2016 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya-ARFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay-DR

…uted in more than one instalment and hence the volume looks high. Accordingly he submitted that the consistency in the treatment of the gains arising on sale of shares should be maintained as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gopal Purohit (228 CTR 582) and hence the gains arising on sale of such shares should be assessed as capital gains only. 5. On the contrary, the Ld D.R submitted that the assessee has been purchasing and selling shares continuously and hence the volume and frequency of transactions were very high. He further submitted that the period of holding was as low as one day and 4…

ACIT Cir 15(1), Mumbai vs. Amrita Talwar, Mumbai

ITA 6628/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja: Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs Smt. Amrita Talwar Tax-15(1), Mumbai (Appellant) Flat No. 20, Matru Chhaya, 70, Marine Drive, Mumbai 400 020. Pan : Adlpt7551R (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Shri G.N. Makwana
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)

…res i.e. as to whether it is taxable as short term and long term capital gains or as business income. This is a highly debatable issue on which there may be two divergent view of the assessee and the AO. In the case of Gopal Purohit, Hon’ble Bombay High Court 228 CTR 582 has held that it is a mixed question of facts and law as to whether income from shares in the hands of the assessee is taxable as capital gain or business income. Otherwise also, it is not the case of either furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income. The AO has also not been able to point out if there is any default…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) RG 4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 733/MUM/2011[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 195(2)Section 254(1)Section 44Section 44B

…अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.6394/Mum/08 ,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-Not Applicable आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy…

Dy. Director of I-Tax (Int. Tax)-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nuclear Power Corpn. of India Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6394/MUM/2008[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 195(2)Section 254(1)Section 44Section 44B

…अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.6394/Mum/08 ,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-Not Applicable आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy…

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. H.K. Financiers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1526/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Patodi, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N o n e
Section 143(3)

…ther at market price or cost price and according to us there is no justification in the order of AO to treat the capital gain arising out of the shares as business. Similar view is taken by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit (2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.), wherein it has been held as under: “Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that it was open to the assessee to maintain two separate portfolios, one relating to investment and another relating to business of dealing in shares, that a finding of fact had been arrived at by the Tribunal as regards the two distinct types of transactions, namely,…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla Suresh Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4476/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4475/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4366/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5303/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5302/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 3053/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

DCIT 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 2469/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5442/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5441/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court 12 ITA Nos.5442/M/2008 & ITA Nos.5441/M/2008 & Others Shri Suresh K. Jajoo & Smt. Vimala S. Jajoo in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…