Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/3391/2010 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/3391/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 15 Mumbai v. B.n. Mittal Huf

High Court 16 Aug 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/3391/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 15 Mumbai v. B.n. Mittal Huf
Date of order
16 Aug 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/3391/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 15 Mumbai v. B.n. Mittal Huf, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: DATED : 16TH AUGUST, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the income received by the assessee on sale of shares was liable to be assessed as short term capital gains instead of assessing it as business income as held by the assessing officer, is the question raised in this a...

Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

sas IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3391 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-15, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. Shri B. N. Mittal (HUF)..Respondent. Mr. Ravindra A. Lokhande for the appellant.None for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATED : 16TH AUGUST, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the income received by the assessee on sale of shares was liable to be assessed as short term capital gains instead of assessing it as business income as held by the assessing officer, is the question raised in this appeal. 2.The ITAT in para 4 of its order has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee held the shares for a considerable period of time, during which the assessee received bonus shares and also dividend. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be said to be trading in shares but held the shares as investment and, therefore, the income from the share transaction was liable to be assessed under the head short term capital gains. The decision of the Tribunal is based on finding of fact and no substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. (K.K. TATED, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
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