CIT v. DLF Commercial Developers Ltd.

35 Taxmann.com 280High Court2013#2266 most cited

What is CIT v. DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. authority for?

Loss incurred by certain types of companies in trading derivatives is considered speculative loss under the Explanation to Section 73, as the value of stock derivatives depends on shares. Such speculative losses are ineligible for set-off or carry forward against business income.

51

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. · speculation loss · Section 73 · Explanation to Section 73 · derivative trading loss · stock derivatives · set-off of speculative loss · carry forward of losses · Section 43(5) · deemed speculative business · Delhi High Court 2013

Also reported as

218 Taxmann 45261 CTR 127

Sections most often in play

Section 73Section 14ASection 43(5)Section 8DSection 143(3)Section 10Section 10(33)Section 10A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

speculation losssection 73section 43(5)speculative transactioncarry forward of lossesminimum alternate taxeligible businesssection 43section 14aincome-tax officersection 12section 10

Judgments citing CIT v. DLF Commercial Developers Ltd.

DCIT 4 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Dharamshi Securities P Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 6789/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6789/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit-4(1)(1) M/S Dharamshi Securities Limited 6Th Floor, 640, Aaykar Bhawan बनाम/ 1073, Quest, Behind Beau Monde Towers M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Rajabhau Desai Marg, Prabhadevi Vs. Mumbai – 400 025 Pan No.: Aaacd-3924-G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Paresh Shaparia- Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sunil Jha- Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 25/05/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 27/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Paresh Shaparia- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Jha- Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)Section 73Section 73(1)

…shares then such company shall be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent to which such business consist of purchase and sale of shares and relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. (261 CTR 126) which held that stock derivative value is dependent on shares and therefore, the explanation to Sec. 73 would apply, Ld. AO opined that the explanation to Sec. 73 was applicable and the losses were speculative in nature. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled for set-off of the losses. Further, the assessee was not covered under any of the…

Deutsche Investments India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 12, Mumbai

Accordingly, the order passed u/s 263 is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3630/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3630/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashima Gupta, AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…tes to the financial statements, which was already available with the AO. He further observed that in the present proceedings, the assessee was required to explain why the ratio of the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of DLF commercial developers Ltd (261 CTR 127) holding that losses arising out of transactions in futures and options are in the nature of speculation losses in terms of section 73 of the Act, should not be applied. In response, assessee submitted that it is a nonbanking financial company and provisions of section 73 is not applicable and with regards to CBDT instructions, it was 9 I.T.A. No…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4793/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…summarised the findings of the AO given from pages 31 to 81 of the assessment order, in his written submissions. 53. At the outset, he submitted that in the Assessment Year 2009-10, the Hon'ble High Court in the case of DLF Commercial Developers Ltd., (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 10 has remanded the matter to the Tribunal analyzed the case in the light of the provision of SEZ Act, 2005 which Tribunal has not independently done and set aside the matter back to the file of the Tribunal to decide afresh and in accordance with law. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: “In the present appeals,…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4187/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…summarised the findings of the AO given from pages 31 to 81 of the assessment order, in his written submissions. 53. At the outset, he submitted that in the Assessment Year 2009-10, the Hon'ble High Court in the case of DLF Commercial Developers Ltd., (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 10 has remanded the matter to the Tribunal analyzed the case in the light of the provision of SEZ Act, 2005 which Tribunal has not independently done and set aside the matter back to the file of the Tribunal to decide afresh and in accordance with law. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: “In the present appeals,…

Urja Investment P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3286/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Urja Investments Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt.Ltd Income Tax-4(2)(1) Ground Floor, Khatau Bldg Aayakar Bhavan 8/10, Alkesh Dinesh Mody Mumbai Marg, Fort Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaacu0637N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM M/s. Urja Investments Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Pvt.Ltd Income Tax-4(2)(1) Ground Floor, Khatau Bldg Aayakar Bhavan 8/10, Alkesh Dinesh Mody Mumbai Marg, Fort Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No.AAACU0637N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ketan L. Vajani Revenue by Shri Rajeev Gubgotra Date of Hearing 12/07/2019 Date of Pronouncement 26/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.3286/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2012-13 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2749/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel
Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…summarised the findings of the AO given from pages 31 to 81 of the assessment order, in his written submissions. 53. At the outset, he submitted that in the Assessment Year 2009-10, the Hon'ble High Court in the case of DLF Commercial Developers Ltd., (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 10 has remanded the matter to the Tribunal analyzed the case in the light of the provision of SEZ Act, 2005 which Tribunal has not independently done and set aside the matter back to the file of the Tribunal to decide afresh and in accordance with law. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DE…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2126/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel
Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…summarised the findings of the AO given from pages 31 to 81 of the assessment order, in his written submissions. 53. At the outset, he submitted that in the Assessment Year 2009-10, the Hon'ble High Court in the case of DLF Commercial Developers Ltd., (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 10 has remanded the matter to the Tribunal analyzed the case in the light of the provision of SEZ Act, 2005 which Tribunal has not independently done and set aside the matter back to the file of the Tribunal to decide afresh and in accordance with law. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DE…

DCIT 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Adroit Share and Stock Brokers P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3282/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 43(5)Section 73

…eleted on this account itself. It may further be mentioned here that the appellant has taken legal and alternative ground also. According to the appellant as per decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. (2013) 35 Taxmann.com 280 (Del), the transactions in future and options has also been decided as speculative in nature. This decision is a solitary decision from High Court and has not been contradicted by any other High Court or the Hon'ble Supreme Court and therefore, it is binding for all the appellate/judicial authorities below the High Court. It has been submi…

Diwali Capital & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC-2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3108/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3107/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3108/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 43(5)Section 73

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “SMC” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3107/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3108/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2014-15) Diwali Capital & Finance The Dy. Commissioner of Private Ltd. Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), 8th Floor, Room No. 113, Commerce House, 140, Vs. N.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 806, Old CGO Bldg, M.K. 023 Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent)…

Diwali Capital & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3107/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3107/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3108/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 43(5)Section 73

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “SMC” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3107/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3108/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2014-15) Diwali Capital & Finance The Dy. Commissioner of Private Ltd. Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), 8th Floor, Room No. 113, Commerce House, 140, Vs. N.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 806, Old CGO Bldg, M.K. 023 Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent)…

Anil Finature Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4208/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: S/shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Shri Harkamal Sohi, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 43(5)(d)Section 73

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री जी. मंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4208/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Anil Finature Private Limited The Dy. Commissioner of 101, Vallabh Vihar, M.G. Income Tax, Income Tax Vs. Road, Ghatkopar (E), Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 077 Mumbai-400 020 .. (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AACCA5377K अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant by : S…

Magic Share Traders Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the assessee gets relief as claimed in Ground Nos

ITA 770/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, A.R
Section 14ASection 28Section 43(5)Section 73

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘C’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 770/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Magic Share Traders Ltd. बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner of 101, Akashganga Building, Income Tax Vs. Nr. Gujarat College Road, Circle-2(1)(2), 1st Floor, Navjivan Trust Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad - 380006 Building Office, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad - 380014 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECM9542L .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respond…

DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jet Age Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1359/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1359/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Jet Age Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcj 0993 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 94(7)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1359/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata -vs- M/s Jet Age Securities Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCJ 0993 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate Date of Hearing : 19.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 26. 10.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-11, Kol…

M/S. Sucon India Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Faridabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 6203/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No.6203/Del/2015 (Assessment Years 2012-13) M/S. Sucon India Ltd. Vs. Jcit Ff-9, Vishnu Palace, Range-Ii Sector-20B, Ajronda, Faridabad Faridabad Pan :Aappm8352G Assessee By : Sh. Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 .10.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 43(5)Section 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.6203/Del/2015 (Assessment Years 2012-13) M/s. Sucon India Ltd. Vs. JCIT FF-9, Vishnu Palace, Range-II Sector-20B, Ajronda, Faridabad Faridabad PAN :AAPPM8352G Assessee by : Sh. Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 27.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 05 .10.2018 ORDER Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member : Appellant, M/s. Sucon India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the assessed), by filing present appeal sought to set as…

ACIT - 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Progressive Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5317/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit-4(2)(1), M/S Progressive Share Room No.642, 6Th Floor, Brokers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, B, 1St Floor, Fort Chambers, Vs. M. K. Road, Homi Modi Cross Street, Mumbai-400020 Off. Hamam Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaacp6712H

Section 14ASection 43(5)Section 73

…e decision from Hon'ble Bombay High Court relied upon by the Ld. DR in the case of CIT vs Lokmat Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. ((Supra)) and also the decision from Delhi High Court in DLF 31 M/s Progressive Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Commercial Developers Ltd. (2013) 261 CTR 127 (Del.), the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs CIT (255 ITR 273)(Supreme Court), Special Bench decision of Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in Shree Capital Services Ltd. vs ACIT (2009) 121 ITD 498 (Kol. ITAT)(SB) and thereafter came to a particular conclusion. The peculiarity of business of the assessee and management of t…

DCIT 3(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7797/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM ITA No.7654/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09) DCIT CIR 3(1) Vs. M/s. Edelweiss Capital Ltd., 4th R.No.607, Aayakar Bhavan Edelweiss House, Floor, Mumbai – 400 020 Off. CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai – 400 098 PAN/GIR No. AAACE1461E Appellant) .. Respondent) DCIT CIR 3(1) Vs. M/s. Edelweiss Capital Ltd., 14th R.No.607, Aayakar Bhavan Floor, Express Towers, Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 PAN/GIR No. AAACE1461E Appellant) .. Respondent) M/s. Edelweiss Capital Ltd., Vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1…

ACIT Cir 7(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Laxmi Venture (India) Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6379/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Circle-7(1)(2) M/S. Laxmi Venture India Room No.130, First Floor, बनाम/ Ltd., 36/40, Mahalaxmi Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bridge Arcade, Vs. Road, Mumbai 400 020 Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400 037 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacl1982G यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Haridas Bhat याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Ms. Aarju Garodia ुनवाई की तायीख / 12/03/2018 Date Of Hearing : आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 12/03/2018

Section 263Section 73

…ction 73 of the Act by contending that necessary enquiry was not made by the Assessing Officer and the assessee is having other activities and share trading is not the major activity/principal business of the assessee. Reliance was placed upon the decision in 261 CTR 127 (Del.), 174 TTJ 875 (Cal.), 152 ITD 652 (Cal.) and 69 taxman.com 170(SC). It was contended that there is non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer, thus, invocation of revisional jurisdiction by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) may be upheld. 2.2. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on rec…

ITO, WD -3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2330/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2330/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward-3(1)(1), M/S. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 666, 6Th Floor, 408, Tulsiyani Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabca 1755 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. V. Rajguru ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 19.01.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing That The Loss Of Rs.2,46,31,762/- On Account Of Derivative Trading Cannot Be Treated As Speculation Loss & Failed To Appreciate That The Case Of The Assessee Squarely Falls Within Ambit Of Explanation To S.73 Of The I.T. Act"

For Appellant: Shri M. V. RajguruFor Respondent: None
Section 14ASection 2Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 73

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “एल” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2330/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), M/s. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 666, 6th Floor, 408, Tulsiyani Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCA 1755 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri M. V. Rajguru ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख…

ACIT-9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Global Jewellery Pyt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2657/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit-9(3)(2) M/S Global Jewellery 418, 4Th Floor, Vs. Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, G-49, Gem & Jewellery Mumbai-400020. Complex, Seepz, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400096. Pan No. Aabcg5222E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shir Ram Tiwari, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/11/2017

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shir Ram Tiwari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT-9(3)(2) M/s Global Jewellery 418, 4th floor, Vs. Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, G-49, Gem & Jewellery Mumbai-400020. Complex, Seepz, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400096. PAN No. AABCG5222E Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Shir Ram Tiwari, DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 29/08/2017 Date of pronouncement : 16/11/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2012-13. The appeal is dir…

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S I.T.C. Ltd

ITA/77/2005HC Delhi04 Jul 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 194Section 201Section 260ASection 271C

…n Shankar Trading (P) Limited v. CIT 208 Taxman 526 (Del). In support of the contention that a term used in the statute should be contextually interpreted, reliance was placed by Mr. Vohra on the decision in CIT v. DLF Commercial Developers Limited (2013) 261 CTR 127 (Del). 17. The relevant clauses in the LA have been extracted hereinabove. Although a plain reading of Clause 2 of the LA might show that the payment by the Assessee to the AI for the operation of the executive lounge at IGI Airport is split into two distinct parts viz., , royalty and the fees for the space, it is in effect a payment for t…