← All Phrases

“short term capital gain”

Capital GainsSection 2(42A)Section 2(42A)1,986 judgments

The decision most relied on for short term capital gain is CIT v. Ace Builders (P) Ltd. (281 ITR 210), cited in 88 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on short term capital gain

CIT v. Ace Builders (P) Ltd.
281 ITR 210 · 2005 · High Court
88
citing judgments

The deeming fiction in Section 50, which treats capital gains from depreciable assets as short-term, applies only for the purpose of computing capital gains under that section. For other provisions, such as set-off of losses under Section 74 or deductions under Section 54E/54EC, the asset's original character (long-term or short-term) is to be considered.

CIT, Panji v. Dempo Company Limited
74 Taxmann.com 15 · 2016 · Supreme Court
62
citing judgments

The 20% tax rate under Section 112 applies to capital gains arising from the transfer of a depreciable asset, even if it is deemed a short-term capital gain under Section 50, provided the asset was held for more than 36 months. The fiction created by Section 50 for treating such gains as short-term does not alter the long-term nature of the asset for applying the tax rate under Section 112.

Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT
77 ITR 253 · 1970 · Supreme Court
49
citing judgments

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.

Indl. Development Co. (P) Ltd., 82 ITR 588 (SC). (ii). CIT v. H. Holck Larsen
288 ITR 641 · 2007 · Reported
41
citing judgments

Surplus received on sale and purchase of shares should be treated as capital gains (short-term or long-term as applicable) and not as business income.

Mrs. Madhu Kaul v. CIT
363 ITR 54 · 2014 · High Court
35
citing judgments

The period of holding a flat for capital gains purposes commences from the date of the allotment letter and the first installment payment, not from the later date of possession or registration.

Gopal Purohit v. JCIT
29 SOT 117 · 2009 · ITAT
33
citing judgments

The revenue is debarred from taking inconsistent stands on similar facts across different assessment years, adhering to the rule of consistency. Short-term capital gains are assessable under the head 'Capital Gains' only.

Raja Bahadur Visheshwar Singh v. CIT
73 ITR 652 · 1969 · Supreme Court
26
citing judgments

The intention of the assessee at the time of purchasing shares is a key criterion to determine capital gains treatment. This intention can be ascertained from how the purchase was treated in the assessee's books.

JCIT v. Montgomery Emerging Marketing Funds,\n
100 ITD 217 · 2006 · ITAT
23
citing judgments

Each transaction can be considered a separate source of income, allowing taxpayers to choose between the Income-tax Act and a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) for each transaction. Section 70(2) of the Act does not prescribe an order for setting off specific short-term capital losses against specific short-term capital gains, favouring the taxpayer in interpretation.

Judgments citing short term capital gain

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Jhansi Rani Boppana, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 694/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Tara Chand Boppana, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 692/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Sarat Gopal Boppana, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 690/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

Tara Chand Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 646/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

Kavya Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 642/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

Sarat Gopal Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 638/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

Sarat Gopal Boppana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 637/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali MohanFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 50C

partly allowing ground nos. 5 to 5.6 taken before him with regard to the addition of Rs. 9,65,20,662/- as Short Term Capital Gains. c) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the taxability of capital gains has already occurred in AY 2016-17 and that ... long term capital gains instead of splitting the capital gains as long term capital gains for land and short term capital gains for transfer of commercial space. g) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made of Rs.3,65,20,662/- towards short term capital gains

Ashish, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle Intl. Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with consequential effects

ITA 2145/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21 Ashish, Vs Acit, E-138, Kalka Ji, Circle Int. Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi – 110 019. New Delhi. Pan: Ahipg5987B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Chinu Bhasin, Ca & Shri Sagar Rajpoot, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Ms Chinu Bhasin, CA &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

assessment was completed whereby the Long term capital loss (LTCL) declared by the Assessee amounting to Rs.70,19,601 was recomputed as short term capital gain of Rs.1,22,72,900, thereby assessing the income at Rs.l,75,18,505. In computing the same, the AO further did not allow ... discussion above, it can only be after 25.09.2017. Thus, the gain arising from sale of said share was treated as short term capital gains. The Ld.CIT(A) observed, that the possession of the flat was obtained in 2018 and the flat was sold on 23.07.2019. and as it is trite

Suresh Chand Bansal, Haryana vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, Delhi

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

ITA 3666/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

filed by the assessee u/s 153A of the Act, revealed that assessee had declared additional income of Rs.19,18,910/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain arisen on sale of shares of M/s Sapbelle Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had submitted ... income and completed the assessment based on the above revised return of income in which assessee has declared additional income relating to Short Term Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income

Amit Bansal, Haryana vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, Delhi

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

ITA 3665/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

filed by the assessee u/s 153A of the Act, revealed that assessee had declared additional income of Rs.19,18,910/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain arisen on sale of shares of M/s Sapbelle Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had submitted ... income and completed the assessment based on the above revised return of income in which assessee has declared additional income relating to Short Term Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income

Amit Bansal, Haryana vs. ACIT Central Circle-16, Delhi

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

ITA 3664/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

filed by the assessee u/s 153A of the Act, revealed that assessee had declared additional income of Rs.19,18,910/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain arisen on sale of shares of M/s Sapbelle Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had submitted ... income and completed the assessment based on the above revised return of income in which assessee has declared additional income relating to Short Term Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income

Rishi Goyal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1690/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

connection with the transfer of the property. Accordingly, the same was disallowed and, accordingly, the Assessing Officer revoked the Short Term Capital Gain at Rs.17,46,982/-. 4. Further, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had claimed carry forward of Short Term Capital Loss of Rs.8,60,931/- relating ... Assessment Year 2008-09 and the same was set off against the current year Short Term Capital Gain. The assessee filed the details of Short Term Capital Loss relating to Assessment Year 2008-09 and after going through the details submitted by the assessee, AO noticed that the loss

Rupesh Dhirajlal Shah, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 151/MUM/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhrirupesh Dhirajlal Shah Vs. Assessing It Officer-Ward Flat No. 6, 1St Floor, 22(3)(1) Methdoot Building, Piramal Chamber, Gulmohar Cross Road No. Lalbaug, 6, Nr. Lahiri House, Jvpd Parel, Mumbai-400012 Sceheme, Vileparle West, Mumbai-400049 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafps9285G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ShahFor Respondent: Shri Nagnath Pasale
Section 250Section 68Section 69C

under: “……the assessee has not made any offline purchases and there was no LTCG and only a short rotational transaction resulting in short term capital gain (STCG for short) and short term capital loss (STCL for short) and that too a nominal loss – HELD THAT:- the assessee has furnished

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sp Port Maintenance Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3896/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

funds raised by issuing of Optional Convertible Debentures (considered entirely equity in nature) and subscribed by holding company. The company had earned short term capital gains on redemption of mutual funds and the same are correctly accounted and offered for tax. Further, the assessee has not debited any expenditure pertaining

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sp Port Maintenance Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue are dismissed in the above terms

ITA 3895/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan & Dcit 3(3)1 Vs. Sp Port Maintenance Private Room No. 522, Aaykar Bhavan, M. Limited K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 41/44, Shapoorji Pallonji 400 020. Centre Mumbai, Colaba S.O, Pan: Aaxcs6219B Mumbai – 400 005. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

funds raised by issuing of Optional Convertible Debentures (considered entirely equity in nature) and subscribed by holding company. The company had earned short term capital gains on redemption of mutual funds and the same are correctly accounted and offered for tax. Further, the assessee has not debited any expenditure pertaining

Satya Sankalp Villa (Ellisbridge) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1132/AHD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1132/Ahd/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05) िनधा"रण वष" Satya Sankalp Villa The Income Tax Officer बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Ward – 8(1), Ahmedabad (Ellisbridge) P. Ltd. Vs. Dharmadev House, Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaics2707B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Mahesh Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2024 24/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xiv, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 16.01.2014 For A.Y. 2004-05. 2. This Is Second Round Of Appeal Before This Tribunal. Before We Adjudicate The Grounds Taken By The Assessee In This Appeal, It Will Be Relevant To Recapitulate The Facts Of The Case.

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

this account is taxable as business income or the amount is taxable as capital gain and whether the capital gain is a short term capital gain or long term capital gain. The A.O. should also find the actual cost incurred by the assessee for purchase of the property in question

Nikunj Dhanuka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 32, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar & Aryan Kochar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arjun Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 250(1)Section 250(6)Section 282

declared in the original return for Assessment Year 2012-13 furnished on 09/10/2012. The income declared in the original return includes short term capital gain from sale of shares at Rs. 57,46,787/- and exempt income u/s 10(38) of the Act at Rs.41,98,896/-. The return ... thereto. The same is available at page 1 to 4 of the paper book. Under the head capital gain, the assessee had declared short term capital gain of Rs. 57,46,787/- and long term capital gain exempt under u/s 10(38) of the Act at Rs.41

DCIT (Central), Bhopal vs. Shailendra Sharma, Bhopal

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

ITA 305/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 153A

case which year the capital gain is to be assessed and whether as long-term capital gain in assessment year 2001-02 or short term capital gain in assessment year 2000-01) should be determined after hearing objections. He should determine the question in the case of one person

Sajjad Ali, Chittorgarh vs. DCIT(Intl)- Jaipur, Jaipur

ITA 459/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha (CIT-DR)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54

Thus in the absence of the above, the cost of acquisition, improvement & indexation cannot be provided. Also the property will be considered for Short Term Capital Gains with the cost of Acquisition as Nil. You are required to show cause why STCG of Rs.1,00,33,670/- must ... considered for Short Term Capital Gains. (b) Also you have claimed deduction/exemption u/s 54 of the Capital Gains by claiming purchase of property of Rs. 1,05,12,601/- on 24.04.2015 for which you have not submitted any documentary evidences. (c) On calling information u/s 133(6) from M/s Sana

Dn Solutions (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 439/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Years : 2017-18 Dn Solutions (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1)(3), No.82, Jakkur Village, Yelahanka, Bangalore. Hobli Bangalore-560 064. Pan – Aafcd 7715 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashik Shah & Sri Vinay Jain, Cas Revenue By : Shri Neha Sahay, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 O R D E R Per Shri Prakash Chand Yadavthe Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising From The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 17/01/2024 In Din No. Itba/Nfac/S/ 250/2023-24/1059828155(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee, M/S Dn Solution India Private Limited Formerly Known As Doosan Machine Tools India Private Limited Is A Company Incorporated On July 05, 2016 & Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading In Parts & Spares Used In Machine Tools & Other Business Support Service Activities. 3. The Assessee Fled Its Return Of Income For Year Under Consideration On 29/11/2017 Declaring An Income Of Rs.18,58,390/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny After Issuing Page 2 Of 8 Statutory Notices. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Made 4 Additions Mentioned As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Shah & Sri Vinay Jain, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Neha Sahay, Addl. CIT (DR)

return of income column 2C, wherein the same amount of Rs.4,85,42,035/- has been shown by the DICEIPL as short term capital gain and it has been accepted by the Department. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of Bangalore Bench of ITAT ... category of intangible assets. . Page 6 of 8 16. We further observe that the recipient company has offered the excess amount as short-term capital gain and the same has been accepted by the Revenue and in such a situation the ratio laid down by the coordinate bench