ACIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad V. M/s.Sri ASL Finvest Ltd., Hyderabad

ITA 1001/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 100122514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T DIWAKAR PRASAD
• Keywords: Business income; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1001/HYD/12 ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 ASST. CIT, CIR-3(2), HYDERABAD V/S. M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD., HYDERABAD. (PAN AADCSW2148D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SRI T. DIWAKAR PRASAD (DR) ASSESSEE-RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA DATE OF HEARING 18 - 10 - 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 7 .12.2013 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30-3-2012 OF CIT (A) IV, HYDERABAD PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN DISPUTE WHICH ARISES OUT OF T HE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS WHETHER THE CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE INCOME OF RS.1,49,14,360/- FROM SHARE TRANSACTIONS AS INCOME UNDER THE HEAD OF CAPITAL GAINS INSTEAD OF TREATING IT AS BUSINESS INCOME AS HELD BY ASSESSING OFFICER. ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 2 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE IS A LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED IN AUGUST, 1995. IT IS REGIST ERED WITH RBI AS A NON BANKING FINANCE COMPANY (NBFC). THE MAIN OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE IS TO FUNCTION AS A N INVESTMENT COMPANY. AS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN TERMS WITH THE SAID OBJECT, IT STARTED MAKING INVESTMENTS IN SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS (MF) AND DERIVED INCOME FROM SALE OF THE INVESTMENTS FROM TI ME TO TIME DEPENDING UPON MARKET CONDITIONS. FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RET URN OF INCOME ON 15-11-2006 SHOWING LONG TERM AND SHOR T TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.45,17,556/- AND RS.1,03,96,804/- RESPECTIVELY AND DECLARED THE TOTA L INCOME OF RS.85,67,964. ASSESSEES RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED AN INCOME OF RS.1,49,14,360/- FROM SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES AND THE SAME HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN P & L ACCOUNT AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. BUT IN T HE COMPUTATION FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS REDUCED THE SAME FROM BUSINESS INCOME AND TREATED IT AS CAPITAL GAIN. HE THEREFORE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN WHY THE INCOME SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. IN ITS REPLY, ASSESSEE STATED THAT SHARE TRANSACTIONS ARE INVESTMENTS ONLY , HENCE INCOME DERIVED THEREFORE HAS TO BE TREATED AS CAPITAL GAIN. IT WAS STATED THAT THE SHARES WERE ACQUIRED ENTIRELY FROM THE COMPANIES LISTED IN NSE . THE DIVIDEND RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR FROM SHARES A ND UNITS IN MF WAS RS.65,39,113. IT WAS STATED THAT O NLY ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 3 BECAUSE OF NUMBER OF PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS , IT IS NOT CORRECT TO HOLD IT AS TRADING ACTIVITY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AN ASSESSEE MAY HOLD CERTAIN INVESTMENTS IN SHARES FOR A LONGER PERIOD AND MAY DISPOSE OF SOME IN A SHORT PERIOD DEPENDING UPON T HE MARKET CONDITIONS, BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT TRADIN G ACTIVITY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NOT ONLY THE ASSES SEE HAS TREATED THE DEALINGS IN SHARE AS INVESTMENTS FR OM THE VERY BEGINNING, BUT THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO ACCEPTED IN ALL THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN I N ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CONTENTION THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON A DECISION OF THE AAR IN 288 ITR 641. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOWEVER REJECTED ALL THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN REGULARLY TRADING IN SHARES BY BUYING AND SELLING OF SHARES A ND SECURITIES. H E FELT THAT THE ASSESSEES ACTIVITIE S WERE NOTHING BUT BUSINESS OF BUYING AND SELLING OF SHARE S WITH AN INTENTION OF MAKING PROFITS AND USE OF BUSI NESS CONDITIONS AS PER THE PREVAILING MARKET SENTIMENTS. HE NOTED THAT ASSESSEES BASKET OF SHARES CONSISTED OF VARIOUS AND NUMEROUS COMPANIES, QUOTED AND UNQUOTED AND IN MANY CASES SHARES OF THE SAME COMPANY HAD BEEN ACQUIRED AND SOLD DURING THE YEAR. HE NOTED T HAT, THIS SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONSISTENTLY KEPT AN EYE ON THE MARKET SENTIMENT AND CONDITIONS WITH PROFESSIONAL ACUMEN, WITH A CLEAR INTENT OF AGGRESS IVE BUSINESS MOTIVE OF QUICK PROFITS. ON THE AFORESAID BASIS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT INCOME DERIV ED FROM SHARE TRANSACTION HAS TO BE TREATED AS BUSINES S ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 4 INCOME AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ACCORDINGLY BY TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,49,14,316/- AS BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. BEING AGGRIEVED OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SO PASSED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). 5. IN COURSE OF HEARING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A ) ALSO, THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THAT THE INCOME DERIV ED FROM SHARE TRANSACTION HAS TO BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAIN AS THESE ARE INVESTMENTS ONLY. I N SUPPORT OF SUCH CONTENTION, THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIE D UPON A NUMBER OF DECISIONS. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE VIS A V IS THE FACTS AND MATERIALS ON RECORD AS WELL AS IN THE LIGHT OF RATIO LAID DOWN IN VARIOUS DECISIONS DEALING IN SHARES BEING INVESTMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE HELD THAT INCOME DERIVED THERE FROM HAS TO BE TREATED AS CAPITAL GA IN. THE CIT (A) SUMMED UP HIS CONCLUSIONS AS UNDER:- 6.18. FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, IT IS AMPLY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO JUSTIFY THE DIFFERENT VIEW TAKEN BY HIM OF THE TRANSACTION OF THE APPELLANT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES DURING THE YEAR, AS AGAINST THE CONSISTE NT APPROACH ADOPTED AND ACCEPTED IN THE EARLIER YEARS. ON THE O THER HAND, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED HIS HO LDINGS IN SHARES AND UNITS OF MUTUAL FUNDS, AS 'INVESTMENTS' RIGHT F ROM THE BEGINNING, WHEREAS THE BENEFIT OF SEC. 111A OF THE ACT WAS INTRODUCED W.E.F. 1.11.2004 ONLY, MUCH LATER THAN T HE ACQUISITION OF THE INVESTMENTS BY T~ COMPANY. THEREFORE, IT CAN NOT BE SAID THAT THE SHARES / SECURITIES HAD BEEN SO CLASSIFIED AS INVESTMENTS' AND SHOWN AS RESULTING IN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS A ND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS ONLY WITH A VIEW TO OBTAIN THE BENEFI T OF THE ABOVE ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 5 PROVISIONS. IT IS ALSO CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MADE REPEATED PURCHASE AND SALE OF SAME SCRIPS ON A REGU LAR BASIS WITH A VIEW TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE MARKET FLUCTUATIONS . IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT DESPITE SUBSTANTIAL VOLUME ON ACCOUNT OF HUGE INVESTMENTS ITSELF, THERE WAS NOT MUCH FREQUENCY OF BUYING AND SELLING SHARES. THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUBSTANTIAL LONG TE RM GAINS DURING THE RELEVANT YEAR AND EVEN IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS ALSO SHOWS THAT THE PURPOSE WAS TO HOLD THE ACQUISITIONS WITH A LON G TERM PROSPECTIVE. IT WAS IN VIEW OF THIS STRATEGY ONLY T HAT THE APPELLANT EARNED SUBSTANTIAL DIVIDENDS OVER THE YEAR INCLUDIN G THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ON A CUMULATIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THEREFORE, THE DOMINANT IMPRESSIO N THAT ONE IS LEFT WITH ON HIS MIND IS THAT THE APPELLANT IS AN ' INVESTOR' AND HAD CONTINUED ITS 'INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES' DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2006-07 ALSO, RE SULTING IN THE INCOME OF RS. 1,49,14,360/- THERE FROM DURING THE Y EAR. ACCORDINGLY, THE INCOME OF RS. 1,49,14,360/- EARNED BY THE APPELLANT FROM THE TRANSACTIONS IN SHARES AND SECUR ITIES DURING THE YEAR IS REQUIRED TO BE TAXED UNDER THE HEAD 'CAPITA L GAINS' ONLY AND NOT AS 'BUSINESS INCOME'. GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT. 6. THE LEARNED DR INITIATING HIS ARGUMENT CONTENDED THAT THERE IS LOT OF COMPLEXITY RELATING TO THE AC TIVITY IN STOCK MARKET, UNLIKE OTHER INVESTMENTS LIKE GOLD , REAL ESTATE ETC. INVESTMENT IN SHARES REQUIRE LOTS OF RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION. ONCE INVESTMENT IS MADE IN SHARE, SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS HAS TO BE MADE EVERY DAY . WHILE IN OTHER INVESTMENTS RISK OF LOSING IS MINIMA L BUT IN CASE OF SHARES THERE IS A GREAT RISK. HE SUBMIT TED THAT, THE NATURE OF ACTIVITY AND NATURE OF BEHAVIOU R IN INVESTING IN SHARE IS SAME AS IN ANY OTHER BUSINESS ACTIVITY AS ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY INVOLVES SOME AMO UNT ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 6 OF RISK. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT MINIMISATION OF RIS K IS ALSO A BUSINESS REQUIREMENT. THE LEARNED DR DEALING WITH THE FACTS SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF 15 SCRIPS BOTH ACQUISITION AND SALE WERE DURING THE YEAR. HOWEVER , THE LEARNED DR FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT INVESTMENTS IN MUTUAL FUND CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS BUSINESS ACTIVI TY. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS ITSELF TO BE A NBFC BUT ITS INCOME FROM NBFC IS ONLY 4 LAKHS WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES AT RS.1,35,71 ,704 WHICH SHOWS THAT THE MAIN ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE IS DEALING IN SHARES. THE LEARNED DR REFERRING TO THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE AS AT 31-3-2006 SUBMITTED THAT UNSECURED LOANS AND RESERVES ARE MOR E THAN RS.7 CRORES, WHEREAS INVESTMENTS ARE RS.8,25,89,612. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS BUYING SHARES FROM THE CREDITORS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT 5 0% OF THE INVESTMENTS ARE OUT OF BORROWED FUNDS ONLY. THE LEARNED DR REFERRING TO PAGE 38 OF THE PAPER BO OK SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE ABOUT SIX DIFFERENT OCCASI ONS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES OF GURARAT NRE COKE . HE SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF SHARES OF GRUH FINANC E LTD., ALSO SHARES WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD DURING TH E YEAR AND ACTUAL NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS ARE MORE. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE HOLDING PERIOD BUT THE FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTION HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT GOING BY THE FREQUENCY AND VOLUME OF SHARE TRANSACTIONS IT CANNOT BE ANYTHING ELSE BUT BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTEN TION ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 7 THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE AP HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PVS RAJU VS. ADDL. CIT (34 0 ITR 75). 7. THE LEARNED AR PLACING THE FACTS OF THE CASE SUBMITTED THAT, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD 40 SCRIPS AND NUMBER OF SALE TRANSACTIONS ARE 175 DURING THE YEAR S. IN THIS CONTEXT, HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 3 7 TO 45 CONTAINING DETAILS OF SHARES SOLD WITHIN A HOLDI NG PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AVERAGE HOLDING PERIOD OF SHARES HELD FOR SHORT TERM IS 123 DAYS AND OF SHARES HELD FOR LONG TERM IS 416 DAYS. IT W AS SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE TOOK A DECISION TO SALE A SCRIP ENTIRE SHARES WERE OFFLOADED, THOUGH I T MAY HAVE BEEN SOLD OVER A PERIOD OF 3-4 DAYS. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN FEW CASES OF RE- ENTRY ARE ALSO DRIVEN BY REASONS. SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO PAGE 41 OF PAPER BOOK, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF MURUDESHWAR CERAMICS LT D., THE ASSESSEE SOLD SHARES WHEN PRICES DIPPED TO 119 BUT WHEN THE PRICES FURTHER DIPPED TO 114 THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED IT. SIMILARLY IN CASE OF PRIYADARSHINI SPINNING LIMITED, RE-ENTRY ON 25-2-2006 IS ONLY IN RIGHT ISSUES. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE LEARNED AR REFERRED T O THE CORRESPONDING ENTRIES AT PAGE 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK. 8. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY SHOWIN G THEM AS INVESTMENTS AND OFFERING INCOME UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT T HE DEPARTMENT IS ALSO ACCEPTING IT RIGHT FROM THE ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 TILL 2011-12 ACCEPTING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THAT BEING THE CASE THE DEPARTMENT CANNOT FOR ONE YEAR SAY THAT IT IS BUSIN ESS WHILE ACCEPTING IT AS INVESTMENT IN ALL OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS. IN THIS CONTEXT, HE RELIED UPON A DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CASE O F GOPAL PUROHIT (228 CTR 582). HE SUBMITTED THAT SLP FILED AGAINST THE AFORESAID JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT WAS DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT (334 ITR (ST.) 308). THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT IN FACT THOUGH THERE WAS LOSS FROM S HARE TRANSACTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALWAYS TREATED IT AS CAPITAL LOSS AND HAS NEVER TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF SET O FF OF LOSS FROM SHARES HELD ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENTS AGAINST INCOME UNDER THE OTHER HEADS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SUCH LOSS HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR ASST. YEARS 2002-03, 2003-04 AND 2005-06 AND ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER EVEN IN SCRUT INY ASSESSMENTS. 9. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE MAIN OBJECT O F THE COMPANY AS PER THE OBJECT CLAUSE IS TO MAKE INVESTMENTS IN SHARES. IN THIS CONTEXT THE LEARNED AR REFERRED TO THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY AT PAGES 16-21 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER DISPUTE THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.65.39 LAK HS AND OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED SUBSTANTIAL DIVIDEND DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AT PAGE 2 6 OF PAPER BOOK. THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT OF ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 9 INVESTMENT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE FACT THAT IN SPIT E OF SUBSTANTIAL APPRECIATION IN VALUE OF INVESTMENT, TH E ASSESSEE HAS HELD SHARES FOR QUITE A LONG PERIOD. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE LEARNED AR REFERRED TO THE DETAIL S AT PAGE 28 TO 33 OF PAPER BOOK. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SHARES AND UNITS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS INVESTMENTS IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THIS METHOD IS CONSISTENTLY FOLLOWED IN ALL YEARS AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT SHARES AND UNITS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN VALUED AT COST AND NOT AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LESS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE NO EMPLOYEES AND NO SALARY COST HAS BEEN INCURRED. DURING THE YEAR THE COMPANY HAS INCURRED TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD EXPENSES OF RS.4,61,489 ONLY. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT INTEREST EXPENDITU RE INCURRED IS AGAINST INTEREST INCOME EARNED AS NBFC. IT WAS SUBMITTED THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT USED ANY INTERES T BEARING BORROWED FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING INVESTMENTS. SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IS OWN FUNDS AND INTEREST FREE BORROWING FROM SHAREHOLDERS WHO ARE A LL FAMILY MEMBERS. THE LEARNED AR REFERRING TO PAGE 3 OF PAPER BOOK AND PAGE 5 OF PAPER BOOK SUBMITTED THAT UNSECURED LOANS ARE FROM FAMILY MEMBERS AND SO ARE SUNDRY CREDITORS. THE BORROWING IS ONLY RS.3,42,89 4. 10. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT TRANSACTIONS IN MUTUAL FUNDS (MF) UNITS CANNOT BE TREATED AS ON TRADING ACCOUNT AS UNITS ARE ALWAYS PURCHASED FROM AND SOLD TO MF AND NOT IN OPEN MARKET. PURCHASE AN D SALE ARE ALWAYS AT NET ASSET VALUE (NAV) OF FUND WH ICH ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 10 IN TURN DEPENDS ON RESULT OF WORKING OF MF. FURTH ER, THERE IS NO SCOPE OF QUICK PROFIT OR LOSS IN PURCHA SE AND SALE OF UNITS. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT SHARES/UNITS HELD AS ON THE LAST DAY OF THE PRECEDI NG PREVIOUS YEAR HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN BALANCE SHEET AND ACCEPTED BY DEPARTMENT AS AN INVESTMENT. HENCE, GA IN ON SALE OF SUCH SHARES/UNITS EITHER LONG TERM OR SH ORT TERM, CANNOT BE TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING 2,00,000 UNQUOTED SHARES OF SPECTRA SHARES AND SCRIPS PVT. LTD., 90,000 SHARES OF SPECTRA AGRO CHEM LTD., AND 20,000 PREFERENCE SHARES OF SPECTA AGRO CHEM LTD. THESE ARE FOR HOLDING OF FAMILY CONCERNS AND ARE N OT HELD FOR TRADING PURPOSE. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE A.P. HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PVS RAJU (340 ITR 75) IS CLEARLY DISTINGUISHABLE ON FACT AND WILL NOT APPLY TO THE FACTS OF ASSESSEES CASE. HE SUBMITTED THAT ON THE OTHER HAND, THE TESTS LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SP ECTRA SHARES & SCRIPS (P) LTD. VS. DCIT (354 ITR 35) IF APPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE THEN THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE CONCLUSION THAT THESE ARE INVESTMENTS ONLY. THE LEARNED AR ALSO RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING TWO DECIS IONS OF THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL:- 1. M/S CRYSTAL INPEX LTD. VS. DCIT (ITA NO.237/MUM/2010 DATED 15-7-2011). 2. ACIT VS. SRI MANISH D. DESAI (ITA NO. 3661/MUM/2010 DATED 27-5-2011.) ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 11 11. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS OTHER MATERIALS ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO APPLIED OUR MIND TO THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE PARTIES BEFORE US. THE ONLY ISSUE TO BE DE CIDED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS WHETHER DEALING IN SHARES ARE TO BE TREATED AS INVESTMENTS AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE OR IT IS A BUSINESS ACTIVITY AS HELD BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. BEFORE TAKING A DECISION ON THE ISSUE, LET US EXAMINE CERTAIN FACTS WHICH HAVE A CR UCIAL BEARING ON THE DECISION TO BE TAKEN. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED WITH THE RBI AS A NBFC. THE NATURE AND CHARACTER AS PER THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE COMPANY AS MENTIONED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, A COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE-16 O F THE PAPER BOOK, IS INVESTMENT COMPANY. FOR THE IMPUGNED YEAR THE ASSESSEE DECLARED TOTAL GAIN OF RS.1,49,14,360 FROM SALE OF SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS OUT OF WHICH LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.45,17,556 WAS CLAIMED AS EXEMPT AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN O F RS.1,03,96,804 WAS OFFERED TO TAX. FACTS ON RECORD FURTHER REVEAL THAT FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-0 2 ONWARDS THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SHOWING THEM AS INVESTMENTS AND OFFERING CAPITAL GAIN IN THE RETURN S FILED. THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO ACCEPTED IT THROUGH OUT EVEN IN SCRUTINY ASSESSMENTS WHICH WERE COMPLETED U /S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASST. YEARS 2002-03, 2004 -05 AND 2005-06. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 200 2-03 WOULD SHOW THAT NOT ONLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEE AS AN INVESTMENT COMPANY BUT ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 12 HAS ALSO ACCEPTED THE LOSS SHOWN FROM SALE OF SHARE S UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN. SIMILARLY, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR T HE ASST. YEAR 2004-05, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DERIVE ANY INCOME FROM BUSINES S ACTIVITY AND IN FACT ALLOWED ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR S ET OFF OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AGAINST BROUGHT FORWARD CAPITAL LOSSES. ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2005-06, A COPY OF WHICH IS AT PAGE 66 OF THE PAPER BOOK WOULD REVEAL SOME INTERESTING FACTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE EXAMINING ASSESSEES CLAIM OF PROVISIONS FOR BAD DE BT WRITTEN BACK AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES MADE CERTA IN OBSERVATIONS WHICH IS WORTH NOTING. FOR THE SAKE O F CONVENIENCE, WE EXTRACT THE SAME HEREUNDER:- IN THE STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME AS SESSEE CLAIMED RS.50,00,000/- AS PROVISIONS FOR BAD DEBT WRITTEN B ACK AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF RS. L ,37,630/-. ON CARE FUL EXAMINATION OF THE ASSESSEE'S RETURNS OF INCOME FOR VARIOUS EARLIER YE ARS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE ANY BUSINESS INCOME OR BUSINE SS OPERATIONS. IT IS ONLY OFFERING THE INCOME FOR TAXA TION UNDER THE HEADS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND CAPITAL GAINS. THOUGH IT WAS NOT HAVING ANY BUSINES S OPERATIONS, IT IS CLAIMING EXPENSES UNDER THE BUSINESS HEAD. WITH ABOVE BACKDROP, ASSESSEE EXPLANATION CALLED FO R AS UNDER VIDE LETTER DATED] 6.07.2007. 'STATE WHETHER SHARES TRANSACTIONS OF THE COMPANY F ALLS UNDER THE ACTIVITY OF BUSINESS OR INVESTMENT'. FURTHER CLARIF ICATION INVITED ON ITS CONSISTENT STAND TAKEN BY THE COMPANY OVER THE YEARS. 'THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE COMPANY IN SHARES FALL UND ER THE INVESTMENTS ACTIVITY. THIS WAS ACCEPTED IN THE EARL IER YEARS. THE REASON IS THAT THE COMPANY IS A NON BANKING FINANCE COMPANY REGISTERED WITH RBI, A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE POLI CY. A COPY OF THE INVESTMENT SCHEDULE ENCLOSED BALANCE SHEET IS FILED . THE SCHEDULE SHOWS THAT THE DATE & PURCHASE COST OF THE SHARES AND SALE DETAILS ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 13 DURING THE YEAR AND REMAINING AS INVESTMENTS AT THE END OF THE YEAR. A T THE END OF THE YEAR THE SHARES REMAINING WITH T HE COMPANY ARE SHOWN AT INVESTMENT PRICE NOT AT THE MARKET PRICE O R INVESTMENT PRICES WHICHEVER IS LESS AS NORMALLY DONE IN CASE OF TRADI NG ACTIVITY. IT MAY BE NOTED THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE EARLIER Y EARS, THE ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS WAS SHOWN AS INVESTMENT COMPANY'. 12. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FINALLY COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY ACCEPTING THE LONG TERM AND SHORT TE RM CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARE SHOWN BY THE ASSESS EE AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE INCOME COMPUTED BY HIM IN PAGE 5 OF THIS ORDER. IN FACT EXCEPT IN THE IMPUGN ED ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ALL OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS, PRIOR AND SUBSEQUENT, HAS ACCEPTE D THE DEALINGS IN SHARES AS INVESTMENTS ONLY BY ASSES SING THE GAIN THERE FROM AS EITHER LONG OR SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THEREFORE, CONSISTENCY HAS TO BE MAINTAINED WITH REGARD TO THE ASSESSABILITY OF GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES. IN CASE OF RADHASOAMI SATSANG VS. CIT (193 ITR 321) THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT THOUGH PRINCIPLES OF RESJUDICA DO NOT AP PLY STRICTLY TO INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR BEING AN INDEPENDENT UNIT, BUT STILL THEN CONSISTENCY IS TO BE FOLLOWED. IF A POSITION HAS B EEN CONSISTENTLY ACCEPTED BOTH BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT IT SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED, UNLESS T HERE ARE NEW FACTS EMERGING. 13. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH COULD HAVE LED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TAKE A DIFFERENT STAND THAN WHAT HE HAS TAKEN IN OTHER YEARS. FURTHERMORE, WHEN THE ASSESS ING OFFICER IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YE ARS ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 14 HAVE ACCEPTED PURCHASE OF SHARES AS INVESTMENTS, I N THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR HE CANNOT TREAT THE GAIN ARISIN G ON SALE OF THOSE SHARES AS BUSINESS INCOME BY HOLDING IT TO BE A TRADING ACTIVITY. A READING OF THE IMPUGNE D ASSESSMENT ORDER WOULD MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT AT ALL SPELT OUT WHAT ARE THE DISTINGUISHING FEATURES WHICH PROVOKED HIM TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. AS IT APPEARS, HE HAS NOT AT ALL CONSIDERED THE FACTS A T DEPTH AND HAS APPROACHED THE ENTIRE ISSUE IN A SUPERFLUOUS MANNER. THOUGH THE LEARNED DR HAS TRIE D TO FILL THE LACUNA LEFT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY MENTIONING A FEW INSTANCES OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES TO SUGGEST THAT IT IS A TRADING ACTIVITY BUT ON DEEPLY ANALYSING THEM IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT THEY A RE NOT ENOUGH TO HOLD IT AS TRADING ACTIVITY. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT THE CIT (A) HAS CONSIDERED THE ENTIRE ISSUE OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES BY EXAMINING A LL FACTS AND HAS RECORDED A FINDING OF FACT, WHICH IN OUR VIEW, IS UNASSAILABLE. IN THE AFORESAID FACTUAL BAC K DROP LET US APPLY THE TESTS LAID DOWN BY JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SPECTRA SHARES AND SCRIPS PVT. LTD . VS. CIT (SUPRA), THOUGH WE MAY HASTEN TO ADD THAT WHETHER A PARTICULAR ACTIVITY IS IN THE NATURE OF INVESTMENT OR TRADE IS PURELY A FACTUAL ISSUE AND W OULD DEPEND UPON THE PARTICULAR FACTS INVOLVED IN EACH C ASE. THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT FOR DISTINGUI SHING SHARE TRANSACTIONS TO BE INVESTMENT AS AGAINST TRAD ING ACTIVITY LAID DOWN THE FOLLOWING TESTS. ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 15 (A) INVESTMENTS ARE MADE WITH OWN FUNDS AND NOT WITH BORROWED FUNDS. (B) THE CLOSING STOCK WAS VALUED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS CONSISTENTLY AT COST AND NOT AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LOWER. IT HAD EARNED SUBSTANTIAL DIVIDEND INCOME. (D) MORE THAN 99% OF THE TOTAL GAINS ARE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND LESS THAN 1% IS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN, 40% OF THE INVESTMENTS ARE IN MUTUAL FUND. (E) THE ASSESSEE NEVER DEALT IN FUTURES, DERIVATIVE S AND OPTIONS. (F) ALL THE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASES AND SALES WER E DELIVERY BASE EXCEPTING ONE SOLITARY INSTANCE OF RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. (G) THE ASSESSEE WAS REGISTERED AS NBFC WITH RBI. (H) THE ASSESSEE NEVER CLAIMED SET OFF OF THE LOSS ES ARISING FROM SALE OF INVESTMENTS AGAINST OTHER INCOME. (I) MERELY BECAUSE OF LARGE FREQUENCY OF VOLUME OF TRANSACSTION, A CONCLUSION THAT AN ASSESSEE IS A TRADER CANNOTBE DRAWN WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE PERIOD OF HOLDING OF THOSE SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE. (J) A TRADER IN SHARES NORMALLY HOLDS THEM FOR A SHORT TIME ONLY AND IS UNLIKELY TO INVEST IN UNQUOTED SHARES OR IN MUTUAL FUNDS HE IS LIKELY TO BORROW FUNDS FOR HIS TRADING ACTIVITY. (K) THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS MONITORING THE ST OCK MARKET AND BUYING AT DIPS AND SELLING AT HIGHS WITH AN INTENTION TO MAKE PROFIT FROM THESE TRANSACTIONS IS NOT CONCLUSIVE OF THE FACT THAT TH E ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 16 ASSESSEE IS A TRADER BECAUSE EVEN AN INVESTOR WOULD NOT BUY OR SELL BLINDLY AND TAKE THE RISK OF SUFFERING LOSSES. (L) THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A ADMINISTRATIVE SET UP AND INCURS CONSIDERABLE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IS NOT A FACTOR TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A TRADER. (M) THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS MAKING REPETITIVE PURCHASES AND SALES OF SAME SHARES IS A FACTOR IN FAVOUR OF HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INVESTOR IN VIEW OF THE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 10(38) AND SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT. (N) THE REVENUE HAD ACCEPTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS AN INVESTOR WHOSE INCOME IS CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. 14. THOUGH THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE JURISDICTI ONAL HIGH COURT IS IN THE CONTEXT OF EXERCISE OF POWER U /S 263 BY THE COMMISSIONER BUT THE RATIO LAID DOWN THEREIN ARE APPLICABLE TO OTHER CASES ALSO AND THER EFORE CONSTITUTES BINDING PRECEDENT. THE TESTS LAID DOWN THEREIN ARE IMPORTANT INDICATORS TO DIFFERENTIATE INVESTMENTS FROM TRADING ACTIVITY. APPLYING T HE AFORESAID TESTS TO THE ASSESSEES CASE IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE INVESTMENTS WITH OWN FUNDS. THE CLOSING STOCK IS ALWAYS VALUED AT COST A ND NOT AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LOWER. THE ASSESSEE OVER THE YEARS HAS EARNED SUBSTANTIAL DIVIDEND INCOME INCLUDING THE YEAR UNDER DISPUTE. THERE IS NO ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE DEALT IN ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 17 FUTURES, DERIVATIVES AND OPTIONS. ALL THE TRANSACT IONS OF PURCHASE AND SALES ARE DELIVERY BASED. THE ASSESSEE NEVER CLAIMED SET OFF OF THE CAPITAL LOSSE S AGAINST OTHER INCOME. UNLIKE A TRADER THE ASSESSEE HAS HELD LARGE NUMBER OF SHARES FOR AN AVERAGE PERIOD O F 416 DAYS AND HAS INVESTED IN MUTUAL FUNDS AND UNQUOTED SHARES. IN FACT, THE LEARNED DR HAS FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT GAIN FROM MUTUAL FUNDS AND UNQUOTED EQUITY SHARES CANNOT BE BUSINESS INCOME. MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR IS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED THE SHARES AS INVESTMENTS AND GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS CAPITAL GAIN. DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO ACCEPTE D IT FOR ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS EXCEPT IN THE IMPUGNED YEAR EVEN UNDER SCRUTINY ASSESSMENTS. IT IS NOT DISPUTE D THAT IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS THE ASSESSEE HAD CAPITAL LOSS OF QUITE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT WHICH WAS NEVER SET OFF. HAD IT BEEN A TRADING ACTIVITY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED SET OFF AS WE LL AS CARRY FORWARD OF SUCH LOSS. ON THE ONE HAND ASSESSI NG OFFICER IS NOT ALLOWING THE LOSS TO BE SET OFF AND CARRIED FORWARD IN THE EARLIER ASST. YEARS BY TREATING IT A S INVESTMENT ACTIVITY. ON THE OTHER HAND WHEN THERE IS GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES IN IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEA R THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS TREATING IT AS TRADING ACT IVITY. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE PUT T O DOUBLE JEOPARDY. THE INFERENCE DRAWN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT BECAUSE OF VOLUME AND FREQUE NCY OF TRANSACTION IT IS A TRADING ACTIVITY IS ALSO NOT ACCEPTABLE. AS HELD BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SPECTRA SHARES AND SCRIPS PVT. LTD ., ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 18 (SUPRA) VOLUME OR FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTION CANNOT B E THE SOLE CRITERIA TO SAY THAT IT IS A TRADING ACTIV ITY. SIMILARLY, THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS MONITORING THE STOCK MARKET AND BUYING AT DIPS AND SELLING AT HIGH WITH AN INTENTION TO MAKE PROFIT IS NOT CONCLUSIVE TO TREAT IT AS A TRADING ACTIVITY. THUS, APPLYING THE AFORESAID TESTS LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIONAL H IGH COURT TO THE ASSESSEES CASE, THE TRANSACTIONS IN PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES CANNOT BE ANYTHING ELS E BUT INVESTMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES CERTAINLY AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN. 15. SO FAR AS THE PARAMETERS LAID DOWN IN CASE OF P VS RAJU VS. ADDL. CIT (340 ITR 70) FOR TREATING IT AS A TRADING ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE IN THAT CASE, NONE OF THEM ARE PRESENT IN ASSESSEES CASE. FURTHERMORE, IN CASE OF PVS RAJU VS. ADDL. CIT (SUPRA) THE ASSESSEE S CLAIM OF INVESTMENTS WAS NOT ACCEPTED BECAUSE ASSESSEE HIMSELF WAS TREATING IT AS A TRADING ACT IVITY PRIOR TO INTRODUCTION OF SEC. 111A OF THE ACT AND WHEREUPON THE ASSESSEE STARTED TREATING THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS AS AN INVESTMENT ACTIVITY. WHEREAS, TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE US, FROM THE VERY INCEPTION HAS BEE N TREATING THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS AS INVESTMENTS WH ICH IS MUCH PRIOR TO THE INTRODUCTION OF SEC. 111A TO T HE STATUTE. IN CASE OF PVS RAJU (SUPRA) MOST OF THE SH ARES FOUND TO BE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE BETWEEN 1 TO 7 DAY S, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE , CONSIDERED IN THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE AND KEEPING I N VIEW THE FACTUALLY DISTINGUISHING FEATURES, THE DEC ISION ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 19 IN CASE OF PVS RAJU VS. ADDL. CIT (SUPRA) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IN ASSESSEES CASE AND APPLYING THE TESTS LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SPECTRA SHARES AND SCRIPS PVT . LTD (SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE FINDING OF THE CIT (A) IN HOLDING THE DEALING IN SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE AS ITS INVESTMENT AND DIRECTING THE ASSESS ING OFFICER TO ASSESS IT AS INCOME UNDER THE HEAD CAPIT AL GAIN IS MOST REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE, HENCE DO N OT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) BY DISMISSING THE GROUNDS RAIS ED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 16. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ODER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17.12.2013. S D / S D / - / - SD/-(B. RAMAKOTAIAH) SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED/- 17 TH DECEMBER, 2013 JMR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 ACIT, CIR-3(2), HYDERABAD. 2 M/S SRI ASL FINVEST LIMITED, 104/105, PANCOM BUSI NESS CENTRE, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD. 3 CIT(A) - IV, HYDERABAD 4 CIT-III, HYDERABAD. 5. ITAT, DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, HYDERABAD ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 20 ITANO.1001/HYD/2012 M/S. SRI ASL FINVEST LTD. . HYDERABAD. ====================== 21