INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. MILESTONE FINSTOCK PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1180/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 February 2026AY 2012-13Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, finding no infirmity. The CIT(A) had correctly allowed the interest expenses by considering sufficient interest-free funds, treated share trading loss as a business loss as Section 73 was not applicable to NBFCs, allowed indexation benefit based on CBDT circulars and Supreme Court rulings, and deleted the addition on share application money after verifying identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which allowed the assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13. The assessee, a NBFC, had its income assessed after various disallowances by the AO, including interest expenses, loss on share trading, and denial of indexation benefit on capital gains. The CIT(A) had deleted these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in allowing interest expenses, treating share trading loss as a business loss, granting indexation benefit not claimed in the return, and deleting additions on share application money.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order dated 24.09.2020 of the CIT(Appeals)-4, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012–13. 2. The appeal has been filed by the revenue with a delay of 1075 days and the revenue has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay. The contents of the said affidavit are as under: Milestone Finstock Pvt. Ltd

2 Milesto

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 73

All 521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 73 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →