70 ITD 200 (CHD) Ramnarain Sons (Pr) Ltd. v. CIT

242 ITR 83High Court#20061 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing 70 ITD 200 (CHD) Ramnarain Sons (Pr) Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT 13(2), Mumbai vs. Anand Gupta HUF, Mumbai

ITA 2073/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 143

…ely because the volume of transactions was somewhat large was not decisive to hold that the assessee was trader in shares as held in the case of Gopal Purohit (supra). He referred to the cases of N.S.S Investments (P) Ltd.(277ITR 149) and Ketan Kumar A. Shah (242 ITR 83) wherein it was held that where shares had already been held as investment and were never transferred or converted as stock in trade, the profit on sale of such shares was assessable as capital gains.In view of the above discussions and reasoning,the FAA directed the AO to treat the short term capital gain of Rs.49,54,908/- earned by the assessee…

ACIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Sunil G Raheja, Mumbai

ITA 3539/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Ms. Neha Paranjape & Shri K. Gopal-ARFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-DR
Section 143Section 2Section 254(1)

…shares in question had all along been valued at cost and treated as investment, that he had incurred losses on similar transactions and had not claimed such losses as business loss. He relied upon the cases of Gopal Purohit (228 CTR 582), Ketha Kumar A.Shah (242 ITR 83) and S. Ramaathirtham (306 ITR 239) and argued that entire amount of Rs.1.87 crores was to be treated as STCG. After considering the submission of the assessee and the assessment order, the FAA held that the reasons given by the AO to treat the STCG as business income were generic in nature, that STCG income had arisen from the transaction in onl…

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1527/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhury, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…n iTA No. 16258/Kol/2010 for Asst Year 2007-08 dated 29.11.2011 (Kolkata Tribunal) Vesta Investments & Trading Co.(P) Ltd vs CIT reported in 70 ITD 200 (CHD) Ramnarain Sons (Pr) Ltd vs CIT reported in 41 ITR 534 (SC) ACIT vs Kethan Kumar A Shah reported in 242 ITR 83 (Ker) Motilal Oswal vs Addl CIT reported in 8 SOT 771 (Bom) CIT vs N.S.S.Investments P Ltd reported in 277 ITR 149 (Mad) Janak S Rangwalla vs ACIT reported in 11 SOT 627 (Mum) CIT vs Gopal Purohit reported in 228 CTR 582 (Bom) CIT vs Merlin Holding (P) Ltd reported in 375 ITR 118 (Cal) ITO vs Manimaya Holdings Pvt Ltd in ITA No. 439/Kol/2009…

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1064/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhury, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…n iTA No. 16258/Kol/2010 for Asst Year 2007-08 dated 29.11.2011 (Kolkata Tribunal) Vesta Investments & Trading Co.(P) Ltd vs CIT reported in 70 ITD 200 (CHD) Ramnarain Sons (Pr) Ltd vs CIT reported in 41 ITR 534 (SC) ACIT vs Kethan Kumar A Shah reported in 242 ITR 83 (Ker) Motilal Oswal vs Addl CIT reported in 8 SOT 771 (Bom) CIT vs N.S.S.Investments P Ltd reported in 277 ITR 149 (Mad) Janak S Rangwalla vs ACIT reported in 11 SOT 627 (Mum) CIT vs Gopal Purohit reported in 228 CTR 582 (Bom) CIT vs Merlin Holding (P) Ltd reported in 375 ITR 118 (Cal) ITO vs Manimaya Holdings Pvt Ltd in ITA No. 439/Kol/2009…

70 ITD 200 (CHD) Ramnarain Sons (Pr) Ltd. v. CIT (242 ITR 83) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax