DY CIT,CC-2(3), MUMBAI vs. AVINASH NIVRUTTI BHOSALE, MUMBAI

These appeals in 435/Mum/2021 for A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19 arise out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-48/IT-76/DCCC- 2(3)/2019-20 & CIT(A)-48/IT-76/DCCC-2(3)/2019-20 CIT(A)-48/IT- 75/DCCC-2(3)/2019-20 respectively dated 29/01/2021 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s. 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 29/05/2019 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

The first identical issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in allowing the assessee’s claim of set off of brought forward long term capital loss incurred on sale of listed equity shares on which STT was paid against long term capital gain in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Both the parties mutually stated that the very same issue has been already heard by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y.2015- 16 in and A.Y.2016-17 in ITA No.245/Mum/2021 on 03/11/2021 and the orders are awaited. Both the parties stated that these two appeals may be set aside to the ld. AO with a direction to decide based on the final outcome of the orders passed by this Tribunal for A.Yrs. 2015-16 and 2016-17. In view of this concession given by both the parties, we are remanding these appeals to the file of the ld. AO to decide the dispute in light of the decision rendered by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Yrs. 2015-16 and 2016-17. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue for both the years are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.