1 ITA NO. 8292/MUM/2010 C.O. NO. 58/MUM/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. NO.8292 /MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) ACIT 18(1), MUMBAI VS MAYURI HIRALAL KOTHARI FLAT NO.1701, MARATHON HEIGHTS, JAI BHARAT OIL MILLS COMPOUNDS, MUMBAI-13 PAN NO. AACPK8233B ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.58/MUM/2012 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.8292 /MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) MAYURI HIRALAL KOTHARI FLAT NO.1701, MARATHON HEIGHTS, JAI BHARAT OIL MILLS COMPOUNDS, MUMBAI-13 VS ACIT 18(1), MUMBAI PAN NO. AACPK8233B (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY SHRI SUMAN KUMAR (DR) ASSESSEE BY SHRI PRADEEP SAGAR DATE OF HEARING : 28-02-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-02-2017 O R D E R PER ASHWANI TANEJA, AM :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSSS OB JECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)- 2 ITA NO. 8292/MUM/2010 C.O. NO. 58/MUM/2012 29, MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER CALLED CIT(A)] DATED 30-09- 2010 PASSED AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 19/12/2008 FOR AY. 2006 -07. 2. THE REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1) THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. II) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1 2,19,3561- IS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT APPRECIAT ING THE FACT THAT THE NATURE OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE D URING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR IS TRADING IN SHARES AND THE REFORE, THE INCOME ARISING TO HER WAS BUSINESS INCOME. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING IT WAS JOINTLY STATED BY BOTH THE PARTIES THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVE NUE IS LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS. THEREFORE, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINT AINABLE IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 10- 12-2015. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE PARTIES AND FIND THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAI NABLE IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR ISSUED BY CBDT. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS SUCH. 4. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PR ESSED; HENCE, THE SAME IS ALSO DISMISSED. 5. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECT ION ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (ASHWANI TANEJA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DT : 28 TH FEBRUARY, 2017 PK/-