Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v. ITO (115 TTJ 639)

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…in view of the principals of consistency:  CIT v. S. Ramaamirtham: 306 ITR 239 (Mad.)  CIT v. GopalPurohit: 336 ITR 287 (Bom.)  CIT V. SMAA Enterprises (P) Ltd: 382 ITR 175 (J&K)  Janak S. Rangwalla v. CIT: 11 SOT 627 (Mum)  Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v. ITO: 115 TTJ 639 (Mum.) In view of the above, on ground of consistency, as well, the transaction of sale of shares/ mutual funds must be accepted to be taxable under the head ‘capital gains’ and the treatment of the same as business income is not sustainable. Re: Remand proceedings for AY 2010-11 The aforesaid re-characterization of income arising from sale of se…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…in view of the principals of consistency:  CIT v. S. Ramaamirtham: 306 ITR 239 (Mad.)  CIT v. GopalPurohit: 336 ITR 287 (Bom.)  CIT V. SMAA Enterprises (P) Ltd: 382 ITR 175 (J&K)  Janak S. Rangwalla v. CIT: 11 SOT 627 (Mum)  Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v. ITO: 115 TTJ 639 (Mum.) In view of the above, on ground of consistency, as well, the transaction of sale of shares/ mutual funds must be accepted to be taxable under the head ‘capital gains’ and the treatment of the same as business income is not sustainable. Re: Remand proceedings for AY 2010-11 The aforesaid re-characterization of income arising from sale of se…

ASST CIT 24(2), MUMBAI vs. MITA DIPAK SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is allowed

ITA 1391/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Dr. A.L. Sainiasstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–24(2), Mumbai V/S Smt. Mita Dipak Shah 31–B, 1St Floor, Laxmi Estate ……………. Respondent Azad Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai 400 069 Pan – Afbps112A

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 10(38)

…esentative that interest under section 234C of the Act can be charged on the basis of returned income and not assessed income. For such proposition, he has relied upon the following decisions:– 9 Smt. Mita Dipak Shah i) Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v/s ITO, [2008], 115 TTJ 639 (Mum.); ii) Wipro Information Technology Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2004] 88 TTJ 778 (Bang.); iii) Mrs. Prabhalal v/s CIT, 269 ITR 212 (Pat.). 18. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer. 19. Having considered rival submissions and perused materials on record, we…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MAHESH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 173/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, CIT DR

Section 143(1)Section 271A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘Friday/D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 DCIT, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AALPK4117B Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 17.10.2011 of ld. CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi. 2. Following grounds have been raised in thi…

THE DCIT 3(1) vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD,

ITA 2654/MUM/2005[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2524/Mum/2005 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers Iii, Income Tax, Range 3(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapj 8040P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Ghosh

…interest u/s 234C. It is argued by ld. AR that the AO impose interest without assigning any reason. Ld. AR further argued that CIT(A) has also erroneously upheld the order passed by AO. Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Bombay Gymkhana Ltd vs. ITO (2008) 115 TTJ 639 (Mum) wherein it has been held that interest u/s 234C needs to the levied as per returned income. (A.Y.1998-89) Gujarat Ambuja Cements 14.2 On the other hand, ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. After perusal of all the facts of the case laws we are of the considering view that the interest is u/s 234C to be levied a…

M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD. vs. THE DY CIT RG3(1),

ITA 2524/MUM/2005[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2524/Mum/2005 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers Iii, Income Tax, Range 3(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapj 8040P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Ghosh

…interest u/s 234C. It is argued by ld. AR that the AO impose interest without assigning any reason. Ld. AR further argued that CIT(A) has also erroneously upheld the order passed by AO. Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Bombay Gymkhana Ltd vs. ITO (2008) 115 TTJ 639 (Mum) wherein it has been held that interest u/s 234C needs to the levied as per returned income. (A.Y.1998-89) Gujarat Ambuja Cements 14.2 On the other hand, ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. After perusal of all the facts of the case laws we are of the considering view that the interest is u/s 234C to be levied a…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. H.K. FINANCIERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1526/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Patodi, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N o n e

Section 143(3)

…T V. Ramamrithans (2008) 217 CTR 206 (Mad) CIT V. Associated Industrial Development Co. Ltd. (SC) 82 ITR 586 Janak S. Rangwalla V. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT 627 (Mum. Trib.) CIT V. N.S.S. Investments P. Ltd. (2005) 277 ITR 149 (Mad) Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. V. ITO (220) 115 TTJ 639 (Mum. Trib.) Gopal Purohit V. JCIT, 25(3), Mumbai (2009) 29 SOT 117 (Mum.Trib.) Sarnath Infrastructure P. Ltd. V. ACIT (2009) 313 ITR (AT) 13 (Lucknow) DCIT V. Reena Sarogi ITA No. 1202/Cal/98 & 332/Cal/2001) DCIT V. Kavita Parasramka (ITA No. 1033/KoI/2008, dt. 20.3.09) The ratio laid down by the judicial forums in the above cases is that one h…

Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v. ITO

Judgments citing Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. v. ITO