CIT v. Bharat R. Ruia(HUF)

337 ITR 452High Court2011#11553 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharat R. Ruia(HUF)

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FIEM INDUSTRIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5720/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT(DR) and Shri

Section 143(3)

…payment in exchange rate prevailing on the specified dates. Thus, it is clearly a speculative transaction in terms of section 43(5). He also strongly relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Bharat R Ruia (HUF) (2011) 337 ITR 452, wherein it was held that future contracts for purchase / sale of an underlying security permitted to be traded on stock exchange and settled otherwise than by actual delivery would be speculative transactions. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that here in this case…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAV AURO INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5770/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Md. Gayasuddin Ansari

Section 43Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)

…recognized stock exchange & hence all its F & O transactions were non-speculative in nature. The assessee relied upon the following decisions in support of its contention :- 1. Bombay High Court in the case of CIT -IV, Mumbai vs. Shri Bharat R. Ruia (HUF) - 337 ITR 452 (Bom) dated 18.04.2011 2. ACIT v Hiren Jaswantrai Shah (ITAT Ahmedabad)- (2011) 62 DTR 95 (Ahd) (Trib)-17.6.2011. 3. ACIT vs. Parimal D. Nathwani (2011) 9 taxmann.com 284 (Mum-ITAT) pronounced on January 21,2011. 4. GK Anand Bros. Buildwell (P.) Ltd. v. ITO 234 SOT 439 (Delhi) dated 01.10.2009. 3.2. The Ld. CIT(A) in view of the above facts and c…

ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. COMM OF INCOME TAX RANGE-11 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3406/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodzee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd., 135, Continental Building, Dr.A.B.Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 020 Pan:Aaacz 0243R ...... Appellant Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range -11(1), 4Th Floor, Room No.434, Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: S/Shri N.K.Chand &

Section 143(3)

…transaction loss in the normal course of business being expenditure of revenue in nature incurred for the business of the company allowable u/s 36 /37 of the Act. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) wrongly relied on the Bombay HC decision in the case of Bharat Ruia Ltd (337 ITR 452), facts of which totally distinguishable as it is neither mark to market loss nor the loss on account of currency exchange fluctuation and interest rate swap is neither commodity nor it is purchase or sale of commodity or shares & securities settled otherwise than delivery. 6. The Ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in law and facts in dismissing the appe…

HEETU CHEMICALS & ALKALIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1012/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Mihir Nanivadekar, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.S. Sharma, DR

Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 73Section 73(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Heetu Chemicals & Alkalies Ltd., Vs. DCIT 5(1) E-8 Commerce Centre, Tardeo RD. Mumbai Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 034 PAN No. AAACH1535Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mihir Nanivadekar, AR Revenue by: Shri C.S. Sharma, DR Date of Hearing : 20/12/2016 Date of pronouncement: 16/03/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The appeal is directed against…

M/S. ORION TRAVELS PVT.LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 939/MUM/2009[1991-1992]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 1991-1992

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Manoj Kumar Agarwal () Assessment Year: 1991-92 M/S Orion Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Acit, Cc-31 32, Madhuli, Dr. A.B. Road, Mumbai Worli, Mumbai - 400018 Pan No. Aaaco1591K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ar Respondent By : Dr. P. Daniel, Standing Counsel

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, Standing Counsel

Section 144Section 43(5)

…rchase and sale of units of US-64 falls within the ambit of Section 43(5) of the Act and the US-64 units are commodity. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT Vs. Bharat R. Ruia (HUF) [2011] 337 ITR 452 (Bom). Ld. Counsel for the assessee took us through the head note of the judgment which states: “Section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, defines the expression “speculative transaction” to mean a transaction in which a contract for the purchase or sale of any commodity including stocks and shares is periodically or ultimately settled otherwis…

INDO SHELL CAST (P) LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

Accordingly. This ground is allowed as indicated above’’

ITA 209/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.209/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-2010)

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. B. Nischal, IRS, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.209/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-2010) Indo Shell Cast (P) Ltd, The Assistant Commissioner of A-14, Sidco Industrial Estate, Vs Income Tax, Coimbatore 641 021 Company Circle I(1), Coimbatore [PAN: AAACI 4299N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /…

MAJESTIC EXPORTS,TIRUPPUR vs. ACIT, TIRUPPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3072/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1336 & 3072/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT

Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 8

…tly disallowed by revenue authorities by invoking provisions of section 43(5)- Held yes". I.T.A.Nos.1336 & 3072/Mds/2014 :- 17 -: Further, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that 6.1 the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat R. Ruia(HUF) 337 ITR 452(Bom) wherein it was held that transactions in derivatives are speculative transactions and not business loss. It was held as under:- "Held, allowing the appeal, that the assessee had entered into futures contracts for purchase of shares of certain companies at a specified future date and at a specified price, which were to be settled in cash with…

MAJESTIC EXPORTS,TIRUPPUR vs. JCIT, TIRUPPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1336/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2015AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1336 & 3072/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT

Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 8

STAR EXPORTS & IMPORTS,BANGALORE vs. ADD.C.I.T., BANGALORE

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 997/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri H.N.Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Dhivahar, JCIT

Section 43(5)

…59 SOT 124 and also on the decision of Co- ordinate Bench in the case of K. Mohan & Co(Exports) Pvt. Ltd (Supra). Learned DR also placed reliance on the decision of Bombay High Court in 11 ITA No.997(B)/12 the case of CIT Vs Sri Bharath R Ruia(HUF) (2011) 337 ITR 452 in support of his argument that application of Section 43(5) was not restricted to contracts which are capable of performance by actual delivery and the term commodity occurring in Section 43(5) of the Act would include derivatives. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the orders. First aspect to decide is whether the transactio…