Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata - Ii...

Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata - Ii v. Guiness Securities Ltd

High Court 17 Feb 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata - Ii v. Guiness Securities Ltd
Date of order
17 Feb 2023
Assessment year(s)
2002-03, 2004-05
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata - Ii v. Guiness Securities Ltd, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.

Decision: Accordingly, the appeal(ITA/380/2009) filed by therevenue stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect andthe substantial question of law is left open.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

O-84 ITA/380/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (Income Tax)ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOLKATA - II -Versus- GUINESS SECURITIES LTD. BEFORE :THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 17[th] February, 2023 Appearance :Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.…for the appellant. Mr. R.N. Bandyopadhyay, Adv.…for the respondent. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ forbrevity) is directed against the order dated 4[th] June, 2009passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata(the Tribunal) in ITA Nos.622 & 623/Kol/2009 for the assessmentyears 2002-03 and 2004-05. The appeal was admitted on 2[nd] February, 2010 on the following substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in holding that all incomes of the assessee i.e.,income from interest and brokerage as stock brokerincome from delivery based share transaction andincome from non-delivery based share transactions areto be taken together as arising from compositebusiness of speculative nature ?” We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standingcounsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. R.N.Bandyopadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. As could be seen from the assessment order, the taxpayable by the assessee for the assessment year 2002-03 isRs.37,09,641/- and for the assessment year 2004-05 isRs.79,34,624/- which are below the threshold limited fixed bythe CBDT for pursuing the appeal before this Court. Hence, the revenue cannot pursue this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal(ITA/380/2009) filed by therevenue stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect andthe substantial question of law is left open. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) A/s./S.pal
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan