Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT

77 ITR 253Supreme Court of India1970#2358 most cited

What is Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between income chargeable as capital gains and income taxable as business profits, guiding the assessment of whether a transaction constitutes a transfer of a capital asset or is in the nature of trade.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT · 77 ITR 253 · Section 45 · Section 45(1) · capital gains · business income · nature of trade · transfer of capital asset · colourable device · short term capital gains · long term capital gains

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 44ADSection 45Section 45(1)Section 46ASection 48
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 45(1)transfer of capital assetcolourable devicesection 45short term capital gainsshort term capital gainlong term capital gainsadmission of additional evidencepenny stocksection 10(38)section 44addisallowance under section 14a

Judgments citing Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…ins, the intention of the parties and the systematic way of dealing in order to make ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 58 of 70 profit are to be seen. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions:- Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT, 77 ITR 253 (SC) Janab Abubucker Salt v. CIT, 45 ITR 37 State of Gujarat v. Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd., 19 STC 1 (SC) Tash Investment (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT 106 taxmann.com 190 (Ahd.Trib) Maanraj Trading (P) Ltd. v. DCIT, 23 taxmann.com 458 (Mum.Trib) CIT v. Smt. Minal Rameshchandra, 167 ITR 507 (Guj) Circular No.6/2016 dated 29.2.2016 Press Release dated 24.8.2019 61.…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…ins, the intention of the parties and the systematic way of dealing in order to make ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 58 of 70 profit are to be seen. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions:- Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT, 77 ITR 253 (SC) Janab Abubucker Salt v. CIT, 45 ITR 37 State of Gujarat v. Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd., 19 STC 1 (SC) Tash Investment (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT 106 taxmann.com 190 (Ahd.Trib) Maanraj Trading (P) Ltd. v. DCIT, 23 taxmann.com 458 (Mum.Trib) CIT v. Smt. Minal Rameshchandra, 167 ITR 507 (Guj) Circular No.6/2016 dated 29.2.2016 Press Release dated 24.8.2019 61.…

M/S Unicorn Agro Tech Limited, Secunderabad vs. The Asst. Commisisoner of Income Tax, Hyderabad

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

ITTA/48/2009HC Telangana16 Mar 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…ds on the question whether the excess is an enhancement of the value by realizing the security or a gain in an operation of profit making. Further it was pointed 11 (1965) 57 ITR 21 (SC) 12 (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) ITA NO. 48 OF 2009 REPORTABLE Page 13 of 19 out that the assessee might invest his capital in shares with the intention to resell these if in future there sale brining in a higher price.…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Choudhary, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner of Vs M/s VIC Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACV0132B Assessee by : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been fil…

Smt. Shanta Singhvi, Sojat City, Pali vs. ITO, Ward-3, Pali

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 293/JODH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri N.K. Choudhryita Nos. 293 & 294/Jodh/2018 (Assessment Year -2012-13

Section 271ASection 271BSection 44A

…r in the past or in the future. This status along, cannot turn such activities other than business activities. Considering the facts and circumstances of the instant case, and also relying on the ratio in the cases of Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v CIT (77 ITR 253) & CIT Vs. Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd (100 ITR 706), I find that the Assessing Officer is perfectly correct in imposing penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under section 271A of the Act in this case for not maintaining the books of accounts during the year under consideration, therefore, the same is hereby, sustained. The appellant fails on this is…

Smt. Sushila Devi Kajaria, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 36, Kolkata

ITA 1255/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

Section 143(3)Section 68

…this Court in several decisions. The findings do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The judgments reported in (2012) 20 Taxman. Com 529 (Bombay) (CIT Versus Jamnadevi Agrawal) (1957) 31 ITR 294 (Bombay) (Puranmal Radhakishan Versus en), (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) (Raja Bahadur Versus ern, (1970) 77 ITR 253 (se) (Raja Bahadur Vers Cl'I] and (2015 235 Taxman 1 (Bom) [Cl T Versus Smt. Datta M. Shah) and relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee are distinguishable on facts and cannot be applied to the case in hand. Since no substantial question of law arises in this appeal, the appeal is dismisse…

Navin Kumar Kajaria, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

ITA 1254/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

Section 143(3)Section 68

…this Court in several decisions. The findings do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The judgments reported in (2012) 20 Taxman. Com 529 (Bombay) (CIT Versus Jamnadevi Agrawal) (1957) 31 ITR 294 (Bombay) (Puranmal Radhakishan Versus en), (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) (Raja Bahadur Versus ern, (1970) 77 ITR 253 (se) (Raja Bahadur Vers Cl'I] and (2015 235 Taxman 1 (Bom) [Cl T Versus Smt. Datta M. Shah) and relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee are distinguishable on facts and cannot be applied to the case in hand. Since no substantial question of law arises in this appeal, the appeal is dismisse…

Sri Subrata Banerjee, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 51(1), Kolkata

ITA 2275/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.2275/Kol/2018 & ITA No.1495-1496/Kol/2017 Assessment Years :2014-15, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Sri Subrata Banerjee V/s. ACIT, Circle-51(1), 20, Cape Tower, C-1, DS-2 & 3, Maniktalla Civic Hiland park, Kolkata-107 Centre, Uttarapan, Kolkata- [PAN No. ADRPB 6866 B] 54 _____________________ ____________________ Income Tax Officer, Ward- V/s. M/s Tribute Trading And 4(1), 8th Floor, Aayakar Finance Ltd., 2nd Floor, 3, Bhawan, P-7…

ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tribute Trading and Finance Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1496/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.2275/Kol/2018 & ITA No.1495-1496/Kol/2017 Assessment Years :2014-15, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Sri Subrata Banerjee V/s. ACIT, Circle-51(1), 20, Cape Tower, C-1, DS-2 & 3, Maniktalla Civic Hiland park, Kolkata-107 Centre, Uttarapan, Kolkata- [PAN No. ADRPB 6866 B] 54 _____________________ ____________________ Income Tax Officer, Ward- V/s. M/s Tribute Trading And 4(1), 8th Floor, Aayakar Finance Ltd., 2nd Floor, 3, Bhawan, P-7…

ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tribute Trading and Finance Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1495/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.2275/Kol/2018 & ITA No.1495-1496/Kol/2017 Assessment Years :2014-15, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Sri Subrata Banerjee V/s. ACIT, Circle-51(1), 20, Cape Tower, C-1, DS-2 & 3, Maniktalla Civic Hiland park, Kolkata-107 Centre, Uttarapan, Kolkata- [PAN No. ADRPB 6866 B] 54 _____________________ ____________________ Income Tax Officer, Ward- V/s. M/s Tribute Trading And 4(1), 8th Floor, Aayakar Finance Ltd., 2nd Floor, 3, Bhawan, P-7…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mohinder Puri, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

ITA 2310/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 2(13)Section 28Section 54F

…//FIT FOR PUBLICATION// A.M. J.M. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “A” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2309/Del./2011 Assessment Year 2006-2007 DCIT, Central Circle-18, Shri Arjun Puri, vs Room No.327, ARA W-82A, Greater Kailash-II, Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi – 110 048. Extn., New Delhi -110055 PAN AAEPP9695G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2310/Del./2011 Assessment Year 2006-2007 DCIT, Central Circle-18, Shri Mohinder Puri, vs Room No.327, ARA W-82A, Greater Kailash-II, Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi – 110 048.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Arjun Puri, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

ITA 2309/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 2(13)Section 28Section 54F

…//FIT FOR PUBLICATION// A.M. J.M. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “A” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2309/Del./2011 Assessment Year 2006-2007 DCIT, Central Circle-18, Shri Arjun Puri, vs Room No.327, ARA W-82A, Greater Kailash-II, Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi – 110 048. Extn., New Delhi -110055 PAN AAEPP9695G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2310/Del./2011 Assessment Year 2006-2007 DCIT, Central Circle-18, Shri Mohinder Puri, vs Room No.327, ARA W-82A, Greater Kailash-II, Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi – 110 048.…

Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5845/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 133(6)

…realising his holding; but it would be revenue if he deals with them as a trader. The test often applied is, has the assessee made his shares and securities the stock-in-trade of a business?, as was observed in Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 253 (SC). There is no material before us that shares and securities purchased in the year under consideration and classified as investment in books were actually intended to be held as long term investments. Profits realised by the sale of shares may be capital if the seller is an ordinary investor changing his securities, but it may be income if the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mahesh Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 173/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 271A

…e AO to treat the surplus as Short Term Capital gain and not the business profit. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Radials International Vs ACIT in ITA No. 485/2012 order dated 25.04.2014 " Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh Vs CIT (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) " CIT Vs Rohit Anand (2010) 327 ITR 445 (Del) " CIT-IV Vs Devasan Investment (P.) Ltd. (2015) 229 Taxman 496 (SC) " CIT-IV Vs Devasan Investment (P.) Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 452 (Del) " CIT Vs Consolidated Finvest and Holding Ltd. (2011) 337 ITR 264 (Del.) 14. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the m…

Smt. Lea Ann Kumar, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand

ITA 6067/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu, [A.Ys : 2008-2009]

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dial, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

…o hold shares as investment cannot be inferred from the agreement. However, the fact that no inference of an intention to 7 intention to trade in shares for profit either. As was noted in Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT-Bihar, (1969)3SCC791 = (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) : "The surplus realised on the sale of shares, for instance, would be capital if the assessee is an ordinary investor realising his holding; but it would be revenue, if he deals with them as an adventure in the nature of trade. The fact that the original purchase was made with the intention to resell if an enhanced price could be obtained is…

Kamal Shiv Kumar, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand

ITA 5362/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu, [A.Ys : 2008-2009]

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dial, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

…o hold shares as investment cannot be inferred from the agreement. However, the fact that no inference of an intention to 7 intention to trade in shares for profit either. As was noted in Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT-Bihar, (1969)3SCC791 = (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) : "The surplus realised on the sale of shares, for instance, would be capital if the assessee is an ordinary investor realising his holding; but it would be revenue, if he deals with them as an adventure in the nature of trade. The fact that the original purchase was made with the intention to resell if an enhanced price could be obtained is…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. Dreamland Build Tech P. Ltd

ITA/886/2015HC Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: Itat Being The Assessee'S Appeals). 2. The Common Question Sought To Be Urged In These Appeals By The Revenue Is Whether The Itat Was Justified In Treating The Income Earned By The Assessee From The Shares In Which It Invested Its Surplus Funds As 'Short Term Capital Gains' & Not Under The Head 'Income From Business & Profession'? 3. The Assessee Company Was Incorporated On 19^'^ October 2004. In The First Ay I.E. 2005-06 It Declared Income From The Investment In Shares As

Section 143(3)

…reme Court including G. Venkateswami Naidu, Co. v. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 594 (SC) and CIT v. Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd (1975) 100 ITR 706 (SC), Commissioner of Inland Revenue v. Fraser (1942) 24 TC 498, Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) and Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (Central) (I97I) 82 ITR 899 (SC). JTA Nos. 829/2015, 908/2015 & 886/2015 Page 5 of 7 o 10.The ITAT also referred to the decision of the Lucknow Bench of the ITAT in Sarnath Infrastructure P.Ltd. v. ACIT, (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 13 (Lucknow) which carved out the principle to determine whether a tra…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -3 vs. Dreamland Build Tech P. Ltd

ITA/829/2015HC Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: Itat Being The Assessee'S Appeals). 2. The Common Question Sought To Be Urged In These Appeals By The Revenue Is Whether The Itat Was Justified In Treating The Income Earned By The Assessee From The Shares In Which It Invested Its Surplus Funds As 'Short Term Capital Gains' & Not Under The Head 'Income From Business & Profession'? 3. The Assessee Company Was Incorporated On 19^'^ October 2004. In The First Ay I.E. 2005-06 It Declared Income From The Investment In Shares As

Section 143(3)

…reme Court including G. Venkateswami Naidu, Co. v. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 594 (SC) and CIT v. Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd (1975) 100 ITR 706 (SC), Commissioner of Inland Revenue v. Fraser (1942) 24 TC 498, Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) and Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (Central) (I97I) 82 ITR 899 (SC). JTA Nos. 829/2015, 908/2015 & 886/2015 Page 5 of 7 o 10.The ITAT also referred to the decision of the Lucknow Bench of the ITAT in Sarnath Infrastructure P.Ltd. v. ACIT, (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 13 (Lucknow) which carved out the principle to determine whether a tra…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs. Dreamland Build Tech P. Ltd

ITA/908/2015HC Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: Itat Being The Assessee'S Appeals). 2. The Common Question Sought To Be Urged In These Appeals By The Revenue Is Whether The Itat Was Justified In Treating The Income Earned By The Assessee From The Shares In Which It Invested Its Surplus Funds As 'Short Term Capital Gains' & Not Under The Head 'Income From Business & Profession'? 3. The Assessee Company Was Incorporated On 19^'^ October 2004. In The First Ay I.E. 2005-06 It Declared Income From The Investment In Shares As

Section 143(3)

…reme Court including G. Venkateswami Naidu, Co. v. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 594 (SC) and CIT v. Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd (1975) 100 ITR 706 (SC), Commissioner of Inland Revenue v. Fraser (1942) 24 TC 498, Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT (1970) 77 ITR 253 (SC) and Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (Central) (I97I) 82 ITR 899 (SC). JTA Nos. 829/2015, 908/2015 & 886/2015 Page 5 of 7 o 10.The ITAT also referred to the decision of the Lucknow Bench of the ITAT in Sarnath Infrastructure P.Ltd. v. ACIT, (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 13 (Lucknow) which carved out the principle to determine whether a tra…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahajan Industries P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6295/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Bhoot, CIT- DRFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…t with the subject matter of transaction during the period when the asset was with the assessee. 6.6 The ld. Sr. counsel drew our attention towards the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Raja Bahadur Kamakya Vs. CIT reported at 77 ITR 253 [SC] and submitted that where a person is selling his investment realised on enhanced price excess over his price is not profit assessable to tax under the head of business income. The ld. AR also contended that in this judgment, their Lordships held that if the transaction is in ordinary line of assessee’s business, there would be hardly any diff…