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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 434/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 November 2021AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, with the consent of both parties, decided to remand the appeals back to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the dispute based on the final outcome of the Tribunal's decisions for the assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17.

What were the facts?

The appeals concern the set-off of brought forward long-term capital loss on listed equity shares against long-term capital gains. The Tribunal had previously heard similar issues for earlier assessment years in the assessee's own case and was awaiting pronouncement of those orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in allowing the set-off of brought forward long-term capital loss against long-term capital gain. The decision hinges on the outcome of pending appeals for earlier years.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH & Shri

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
For Respondent: Ms. Shailaja Rai, Shri Vijay Mehta
Hearing: 22/11/2021Pronounced: 25/11/2021

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

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).

As identical issues are involved in both these appeals, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

2.

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.

3.

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.

4.

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

Order pronounced on 25/ 11/2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →