Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii vs M.G.Share & Stock Pvt.Ltd.
2014 Latest Caselaw 3921 Del

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 3921 Del
Judgement Date : 26 August, 2014

Delhi High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii vs M.G.Share & Stock Pvt.Ltd. on 26 August, 2014
$~9
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                                  ITA 177/2014

%                                        Date of Decision: 26th August, 2014

      THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II      ..... Appellant
                   Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr.Standing
                            Counsel

                          versus

      M.G.SHARE & STOCK PVT.LTD.                    ..... Respondent
                    Through:

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

SANJIV KHANNA, J. (Oral)

This appeal by the Revenue in the case of MG Shares & Stock Pvt.

Ltd., relates to assessment year 2006-07 and impugns order dated 8th

August, 2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for

short). The issue raised is whether short term capital gains of Rs.68,06,698/-

on sale of shares, should be assessed as income from business.

2. The respondent-assessee during the relevant time was a registered

sub-broker with SEBI and had filed return declaring income of

Rs.89,47,150/-.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant Revenue has emphasised and

stressed that the respondent assessee was a sub-broker and was dealing in

shares and, therefore, the shares held should be appropriately treated as

stock-in-trade and income earned should be treated as business income.

4. The respondent assessee had declared income from trading in shares

of Rs.21,40,752/-, long term capital gains of Rs.65,29,425/-, and short term

capital gains of Rs.68,06,698/-.

5. Long term capital gains from sale of investment in shares, has been

accepted and is not under challenge. The assessment order records that the

respondent assessee had made investments in shares and was also a trader in

shares. Thus, it is accepted and admitted that the respondent assessee was

maintaining two separate portfolios; one of shares held as investment and

the other of shares held as stock-in-trade. On the date of purchase, shares

became part of one of the portfolios and were accordingly treated either as

investment or as a stock-in-trade. The respondent assessee on the basis of

the two portfolios, had declared taxable income as short term/long term

capital gains or income from trading in shares. This was the position in the

earlier assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 also.

6. In addition to the said facts, the Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals) and Tribunal have specifically gone into the question of

magnitude of purchases and sales; frequency of transactions; ratio of sales to

purchases as shown in the investment portfolio and stock in trade portfolio,

period of holding and even the question whether dividend was earned or not.

7. They have held that there was very limited activity or transactions in

the investment portfolio in the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06 and

2006-07. In the three years, investments had been made in only two, five

and eight companies, respectively. Eight companies in which investments

were made in the assessment year 2006-07, were not sold in the said year.

Contra, in the trading portfolio for the assessment year 2006-07, there were

hundreds of transactions and trading was to the tune of thousands of shares

in 199 companies. In the investment portfolio, in the current year shares of

seven companies were sold and gains were made. There were 23

transactions of purchase in the whole year. No purchases were made in the

investment portfolio in the eight months; and no sales were made in the said

portfolio in six months. Further, dividend of Rs.5,91,580/- had been

received. The Tribunal has also recorded that the assessee had

prepared a chart disclosing the percentage of turnover on account of

investment and trading in the last three years. In the assessment years 2004-

05, 2005-06, and 2006-07, percentage of turnover in shares held in

investment portfolio, viz. percentage of turnover in trading portfolio was

7.03% to 92.97%, 2.23% to 97.77%, and, 44.88% to 95.12%, respectively.

8. The aforesaid factual position tilts the scale in favour of the

respondent-assessee and, accordingly, we do not think that there are grounds

and reasons to interfere with the impugned order. The Assessing Officer had

observed that the respondent-assessee had shown income of Rs.21,40,752/-

as business income from sales of shares, whereas, short term capital gains,

as declared, were 68,06,698/-. This is correct but these figures, by

themselves, would not justify treating the entire short term gains as business

income. Business income from trading in shares can result in good profit in

one year, but lower or marginal in another year because of the inherent risks

involved in the business. The Assessing Officer, in the present case, has

accepted that the assessee had maintained two separate portfolios;

investment, and stock-in-trade portfolio for the shares. There is no allegation

that the shares were transferred from one portfolio to other. The portfolios

have been in existence since the assessment year 2004-05 onwards. The

nature and extent of the transactions in the two portfolios have been noticed.

Investment portfolios had shares of a few companies and transactions were

infrequent. Transactions in the trading portfolio were of thousands of shares

in 199 companies. The ratio of turnover has also been noted. Further,

substantial dividend income was earned.

9. In view of the aforesaid position, we do not see any reason to interfere

with the impugned order and entertain the present appeal. The appeal is

dismissed.

(SANJIV KHANNA) Judge

(V. KAMESWAR RAO) Judge

AUGUST 26, 2014 Sk/kkb

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter