← All Phrases

“short term capital gains”

Capital GainsSection 2(42A)Section 2(42A)903 judgments

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

Leading authorities on short term capital gains

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 gains

Paresh Manubhai Desai, Khar West, Mumbai vs. Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2663/MUM/2025[ 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2663/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year :2015-16) Paresh Manubhai V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward Desai बिधम 22(2)(1), Mumbai Budling No.8, Flat No. 90, Pratishtha Bhava, 3 Rd & 4Th Ramkrishna Nagar, Near Floor, 101 M. K. Road, Khar Police Station, Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Ahlpd1616K Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri. Dnyanesh Patade रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement 21.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Dated 21/03/2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Based-On Circumstances & Facts, The Learned Ao Erred In Treating Entire Sales Consideration Of Rs. 2,09,22,187/- Under The Head Stcg Instead Of Ltcg, Thereby Not Allowing The Exemption U/S 10(38) To The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri. Dnyanesh PatadeFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 250

received sale proceeds from sale of equity shares amounting to Rs.2,09,36,220/- through HDFC Securities. The same was treated as short term capital gains in the hands of the assessee and the assessment was completed at income of Rs. 2,20,82,510/- vide order ... therefore, entitled to claim LTCG exemption u/s. 10(38) of the Act. Accordingly, addition made by the Ld. AO on account of short-term capital gains from these transactions is hereby deleted. P a g e | 6 ITA No. 2663/Mum/2025 AY 2015-16 Paresh Manubhai Desai 6. In the result

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Archana Dalmia, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3998/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3998/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2014-15) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 52(1), 14Th Floor, E-2 Block Civic Centre, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 11002 बनाम Vs. Archana Dalmia, 3, Sikandra Road, Kalmia House, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aagpd-7794-N Assessee By : S/Shri Kunal Agarwal, Chartered Accountant & Manish Agarwal, Advocate Department By: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 10/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2024, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Sold 23,500 Shares Of Durga Enterprises P. Ltd., During The Period Relevant To Assessment Year Under Appeal To Pyramid Commodities (P) Ltd. (Unrelated Party) For A Total Consideration Of Rs.19,97,50,000/-. The Assessee Suffered Long Term

For Appellant: S/Shri Kunal Agarwal, Chartered Accountant &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 55(2)(b)

were used to provide accommodation entries of Long Term Capital Gain to various beneficiaries in lieu of commission. The assessee has shown Short Term Capital Gain on bogus penny stocks of PMC Fincorp Ltd. The AO held that the assessee is one of the beneficiary of aforesaid accommodation entries ... deleting the additions on account of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of unlisted shares and confirming addition of Short Term Capital Gain on sale of penny stock. The ld. DR reiterated findings of the Assessing Officer. 4. Per contra, Shri Kunal Agarwal appearing on behalf of the assessee/respondent strongly