Commissioner of Income-tax-­25 v. Jagrut Gandhi
[Citation -2017-LL-0628]

Citation 2017-LL-0628
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax-­25
Respondent Name Jagrut Gandhi
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 28/06/2017
Assessment Year 2007-08
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags question of law • res judicata • shares held as stock-in-trade • investment in share • exempted income
Bot Summary: 2 The Revenue has filed the present appeal on the following question; 5.1 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was correct in merely relying on earlier orders, and refraining from considering the facts put forward by the AO to show that the Respondent was a trader and not merely investor in stocks and shares. 5.2 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in merely relying on decisions rather than going into the facts brought on record that conclusively indicated that 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2017 17:10:19 ::: osk 111 itxa 1238 2014.odt the respondent was indeed a trader in stocks and shares. 5.3 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Revenue had never treated the shares as stock in trader and therefore cannot take a different stand, ignoring the proposition that the concept of res judicata is not applicable to income tax assessments. 5.4 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was in error in upholding the orders of the CIT(A) restricting the disallowance made by the AO under Rule 8D, in the case of exempt income. 3 Mr.Pinto, learned counsel for the Appellant fairly concedes that in respect of earlier Assessment Year, the similar question had arisen and the same are answered in favour of the Assessee. Even earlier appeal filed by the Revenue in respect of the said Assessment Years are dismissed. 4 In the light of the above, no substantial question of law arises.


IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax 25 Appellant V/s. Mr.Jagrut Gandhi Respondent Mr.Arvind Pinto for Appellant. Mr.Rahul Hakani for Respondent. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 28 JUNE, 2017. PER COURT : 1] present Appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2007 08. 2] Revenue has filed present appeal on following question; 5.1 Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, ITAT was correct in merely relying on earlier orders, and refraining from considering facts put forward by AO to show that Respondent was trader and not merely investor in stocks and shares. 5.2 Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal was justified in merely relying on decisions rather than going into facts brought on record that conclusively indicated that 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2017 17:10:19 ::: osk 111 itxa 1238 2014.odt respondent was indeed trader in stocks and shares. 5.3 Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Tribunal was justified in holding that Revenue had never treated shares as stock in trader and therefore cannot take different stand, ignoring proposition that concept of res judicata is not applicable to income tax assessments. 5.4 Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal was in error in upholding orders of CIT(A) restricting disallowance made by AO under Rule 8D, in case of exempt income. 3] Mr.Pinto, learned counsel for Appellant fairly concedes that in respect of earlier Assessment Year, similar question had arisen and same are answered in favour of Assessee. Even earlier appeal filed by Revenue in respect of said Assessment Years are dismissed. i.e. Income Tax Appeal (L.) No.1341 of 2010. It was for Assessment Year 2005 06. 4] In light of above, no substantial question of law arises. As such, Appeal is dismissed. No costs. (A.M. BADAR, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) CommissionerofIncome-tax-25 v. JagrutGandhi
Report Error