(i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT

42 ITR 743Supreme Court of India1961#7456 most cited

What is (i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Purchase of shares with the intention of selling them at a profit constitutes an adventure in the nature of trade. Such an adventure, if it results in an advantage of income nature, can be brought to tax under profits and gains from business or profession.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Rajputana Textile Agencies Ltd. v. CIT · 1961 · adventure in the nature of trade · shares · profit · business income · section 28

Sections most often in play

Section 19 of Companies ActSection 2(1B)Section 28(iv)Section 47(vi)Section 56(2)(x)

Judgments citing (i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Prakash Nimmagadda, Hyderabad, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)
Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…nder section 28 has a very broad meaning and may be used in different connotations" and that it includes adventure in the nature of trade, as also his reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Rajputana Textiles (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 743 (SC), wherein it was held that where from the very beginning, purchase of shares is made with the intention of selling them, at a profit, it is an adventure in the nature of trade. However, we are unable to see any merits in these arguments either. Whatever be the scope of expression 'business', an advantage has to be of income nature first, and w…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Samagra Wealthmax Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 2165/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Samagra Wealthmax Income Tax, Private Limited, Central Circle-3(4) 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre Room No. 1915, 19Th 37-40 Vs. Floor, Subhash Road, Air India Building, Vile Parle East, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 057 Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqcs5451E

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule – CIT
Section 19Section 41(1)

…nder section 28 has a very broad meaning and may be used in different connotations" and that it includes adventure in the nature of trade, as also his reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Rajputana Textiles (Agencies) Lid. v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 743 (SC), wherein it was held that where from the very beginning, purchase of shares is made with the intention of selling them, at a profit, it is an adventure in the nature of trade. However, we are unable to see any merits in these arguments either. Whatever be the scope of expression business, an advantage has to be of income nature first, and whe…

DCIT, Chennai vs. A.Sivasankar, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 953/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

DCIT, Chennai vs. A.Sivasankar, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 952/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

DCIT, Chennai vs. A.Sivasankar, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 951/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 620/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 619/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 618/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

A.Sivashankar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 617/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…1TR 41 & 4. CIT Vs. R.Ramaiah & Others (Kar) 146 ITR 39 5. The AR for the assessee has filed detailed written arguments as per which the AR has relied on the apex court's decisions in G.Venkataswamy Naidu & Co. (107 !TR 716), Rajputtana Textile Agency Ltd. (42 ITR 743) as well as Madras High Court's decisions in CIT Vs. Sairam (242 ITR 104) to make a case that facts and circumstances of the instant transaction should be considered before arriving at a decision to tax the income as arising out of adventure in the nature of trade. The AR has also alleged that the AO has not passed the test of establishing the bur…

Dinesh Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 489/JPR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jan 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: None (Date was noted)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 28Section 43(5)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 489/JP/2013 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 cuke Shri Dinesh Kumar Agarwal The ACIT Vs. 1057, Pano Ka Dariba Circle- 1 , Subhash Chowk, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABHPA 4416 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by: None (Date was noted) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 16/0…

A.C.I.T. Circle 21(1), Mumbai vs. Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

ITA 4571/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S.L.Tiwari and Ms. Rutuza N. PawarFor Respondent: Neil Philip

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PA…

Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

ITA 3543/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S.L.Tiwari and Ms. Rutuza N. PawarFor Respondent: Neil Philip

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PA…

Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai vs. JCIT 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

ITA 3542/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri S.L.Tiwari and Ms. Rutuza N. PawarFor Respondent: Neil Philip

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PA…

Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

ITA 3541/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.L.Tiwari and Ms. Rutuza N. PawarFor Respondent: Neil Philip

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ7629P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) & Shri Mohan Kapoorchand Vs. ACIT, 20(2), Mumbai Jain C/4, Jeevan Sudha, S.D.Barfiwala Marg, Juhu Lane, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058 PA…

Anand R Bahl, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 20(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed and that by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7706/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Hiten M. Vasant (AR)For Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth (DR)
Section 2(14)

…d. The AO in fact has referred to a host of decisions in the matter, delineating the settled law, and which we may, therefore, cite as under: State of Punjab vs. Bajaj Electricals Ltd. [1968] 70 ITR 730 (SC); Rajputana Textiles (Agencies) Ltd. vs. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 743 (SC); Raja Bahadur Visheshwara Singh vs. CIT [1961] 41 ITR 685 (SC); Lakshminarayan Ram Gopan and Son Ltd. vs. The Government of Hyderabad 1954] 25 ITR 449 (SC); Allahabad Bank ltd. vs. CIT [1953] 24 ITR 519 (SC); CIT vs. Smt. Minal Rameshchandra [1987] 167 ITR 0507 (Guj); CIT vs .Godavari Corporation Ltd. [1985] 156 ITR 835 (Mad); CIT vs. Motilal…

(i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT (42 ITR 743) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax