CIT v. Gopal Purohit

336 ITR 287High Court2011#334 most cited

What is CIT v. Gopal Purohit authority for?

The gain from delivery-based share transactions, where shares are consistently treated as investments and valued at cost in the books, is assessable as capital gains and not business income. An assessee's consistent stand on classifying share transactions should generally be followed by the assessing officer in subsequent years.

254

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gopal Purohit · Section 10(38) · Section 14A · Section 143(3) · share transactions · capital gains · business income · investment or stock-in-trade · consistency · Supreme Court SLP dismissed

Also reported as

228 CTR 582188 Taxmann 14034 DTR 52

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68Section 10(34)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

long term capital gainsection 14asection 10previous yeartransfercompanysection 143businessindiaprescribedsection 143(3)total income

Judgments citing CIT v. Gopal Purohit

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3758/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Dr. A.L. Sainil&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacl8668G V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai L&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacl8668G V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala a/wFor Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh a/w

…taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon‟ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010. The relevant portion of Tribunal‟s order is extracted below for ease of reference:- 8.1 Thus, the nature of activities, modus operandi of the assessee, manner of keeping records and presentation of shares as investment at the…

ACIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Vimla Suresh Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 280/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)Section 263

…t years unless the facts or the legal position justify departure there from; reliance can be placed in this respect on the authoritie of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in 'CIT vs. Darius Pandole' [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in 'CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term capital gains and long term capital gains according to the…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-11, New Delhi

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…the position to be changed in a subsequent year.” 7.18 This view has been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neo Ploy Pack (P) Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 492 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [2011] 336 ITR 287. 7.19 Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Limited (2008) 307 ITR 202 held as : “In case where the department wants to tax an assessee on the ground of the liability arising in a particular year, it should always ascertain the method of accounting followed by the assessee in the past and whether…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

…to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year". Parashuram Pottery Works Ltd. v. I.T.O. (1977) 106ITR 1 (SC). Quoted in C.I.Tv. Excel industries Ltd (2013) 38 Taxman.com (SC) (P.B. page 34 at page 40). Also relies on C.I.T. v. Gopal Purohit (2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom). 12. Further, learned AR argued on the accrual of income in respect of retention money and contended that it has been held by a number of Courts that Retention Money accrues only when the performance period M/s. Commtel Networks Pvt. Ltd., has been successfully completed and the Bank guarantees have been released. Reliance was placed on the…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…the position to be changed in a subsequent year.” 7.18 This view has been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neo Ploy Pack (P) Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 492 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [2011] 336 ITR 287. 7.19 Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Limited (2008) 307 ITR 202 held as : “In case where the department wants to tax an assessee on the ground of the liability arising in a particular year, it should always ascertain the method of 8 accounting followed by the assessee in the past and wheth…

Second Leasing Private Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1565/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rther submitted that principle of res judicata are not applicable to income tax proceedings. In support thereof, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the following case laws:- • Manoj Kumar Samdaria Vs. CIT [2014] 45 Taxmann.com 394 (Delhi) • CIT vs. GopalPurohit 336 ITR 287 (Bomb) • Dalhousie Investment Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 66 ITR 486 (SC) 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the impugned order as well as the case laws cited by both the parties. We find that the main issue is taxing of the income earned by the assessee on the sale of its investment. The AO has taxed the same as…

Shri Sharad Agrawal, Indore vs. The JCIT Range-4, Indore

In the result, all these three appeals of the Assessees are partly allowed

ITA 153/IND/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2009-10

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Sharad Agrawal, JCIT, Range-4 36, Teli Bhakhal, बनाम/ Malharganj Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No. ABUPA9795P Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Rakesh Agrawal, ITO-4(2) 36, Teli Bhakhal, Indore बनाम/ Malharganj Vs. Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No. ADZPA0506H Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Rakesh Agrawal, ITO-4(2) 36, Teli Bhakhal, Indore बनाम/ Malharganj Vs. Indore (Appellant) (Rev…

DCIT 1(2)-2, Mumbai vs. Ozoneland Agro P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4854/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Dr. K. Sivaram and Shri Rahul K. HakaniFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan-DR
Section 143Section 56

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मेमेमेमे खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“C”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं अमरजीत एवं अमरजीत अमरजीत "सह अमरजीत "सह "सह, "याियक "सह "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./4854/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" DCIT-1(2)-2 M/s. Ozoneland Agro Pv…

ACIT -3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Golden Life Finacial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3053/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singha C I T - 3(1)(2) M/S. Golden Life Financial Room No. 607, 6Th Floor Services Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan (Formerly Lifeline Inusrance Vs. Distribution Co. Pvt. Ltd.) Mumbai 400020 125-B, Mittal Court, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacl8998D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajat MittalFor Respondent: Ms. Krupa Gandhi
Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member A C I T - 3(1)(2) M/s. Golden Life Financial Room No. 607, 6th Floor Services Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan (formerly Lifeline Inusrance Vs. Distribution Co. Pvt. Ltd.) Mumbai 400020 125-B, Mittal Court, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 PAN – AAACL8998D Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Rajat Mittal Respondent by: Ms. Krupa Gandhi Date of Hearing: 19.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 02.05.2018 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, AM This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the…

ACIT 26(1), Mumbai vs. Hitesh S. Doshi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7291/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Acit – 26(1) Vs. Shri Hitesh S.Doshi R.No.701C-11 A-1602, Eternia, 7Th Floor, Bkc Hiranandani Gardens Bandra (E) Powai, Mumbai - 76 Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aacpd8612R Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…ld as investment only, whether it is loss or profit. , 4.11 Therefore under the principles of consistency, a different view cannot be taken on the same facts. The rules of consistency as pronounced by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gopal Purohit 228 CTR 522(BOM) would be squarely applicable into the facts of the appellant's case. 4.12 The facts as aforesaid of the appellant's case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of honourable juris dietional ITAT in the case of Nagindas P Sheth vs ACIT. 4.13 Since the facts are similar for this assessment year as compared to the preceding…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Paresh Construction & Foundations P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6850/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal - DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…cepted by the AO in the earlier years, that there was no change in the facts and circumstances,that the AO applied GP margin without giving any cogent reason or without highlighting any change in the facts of the case.He referred to the cases of Gopal Purohit(336 ITR 287)of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and Kotak Securities Ltd.(15 taxmann.com 77) and held that the AO was not justified in adopting the different method for estimation of income in respect of the incomplete contracts;that the facts 2 M/s. Paresh Constructions & Foundations and circumstances for various years,including the year under appeal…

Ramesh G Porwal, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 1727/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.G. NaharFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s now before us. 11. Before us. Ld AR reiterated the submissions made before AO and LD.CIT(A) and further relied on the CBDT Circular No 6/2016 dated 29.02.2016. He also relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Gopal Purohit reported in 336 ITR 287. Ld DR on the other hand supported the order of lower authorities. 12. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground is the treatment to profits earned on sale of shares i.e. whether it is to be considered as business income as held by the AO or to be treated as capital gains as held by…

Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax -Xiii & Anr

ITA/86/2018HC Delhi15 Mar 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…ITA 86/2018 Page 1 of 5 $~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15.03.2018 + ITA 86/2018 and CM APPL.2794-2795/2018 SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Appellant Through Appellant in person. versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -XIII & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % 1. The question of…

Income-Tax Officer vs. M/S. Shraddha & Ihp Jv Wangana Project, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 36/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 194CSection 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी. क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 35/PUN/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Pune. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Shraddha & Prasad JV Khura Varoda “Shraddha House” 1206/1/1, Plot No. 887A, Shirole Road, Pune-411 004 PAN : ABGFS6231A ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 36/PUN/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income T…

Income-Tax Officer vs. M/S. Shraddha & Prasad Jv Khura Varoda, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 35/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 194CSection 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी. क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 35/PUN/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Pune. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Shraddha & Prasad JV Khura Varoda “Shraddha House” 1206/1/1, Plot No. 887A, Shirole Road, Pune-411 004 PAN : ABGFS6231A ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 36/PUN/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income T…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Piem Hotels Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1485/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Piem Hotels Ltd., 90, Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai Vivanta By Tajvs. Mumbai Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai-5 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaact5523G

For Appellant: Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM The Dy. Commissioner of M/s Piem Hotels Ltd., 90, Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai Vivanta by Taj President Vs. Mumbai cuffe parade, Colaba, Mumbai-5 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAACT5523G Revenue by : M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR Assessee by : Niraj Sheth, AR Date of hearing: 20-02-2018 Date of pronouncement : 23-02-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)] in appeal No. CIT(A)-8/IT…

Raguvalika Trading Pvt Ltd ( Since Merged With M.M.Murarka Share & Securities Pvt Ltd), Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 851/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 848 To 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since Merged With M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 848 to 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since merged with M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCR 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 851/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata [PAN: AABM 7219 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate F…

Raguvalika Trading Pvt Ltd ( Since Merged With M.M.Murarka Share & Securities Pvt Ltd), Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 850/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 848 To 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since Merged With M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 848 to 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since merged with M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCR 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 851/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata [PAN: AABM 7219 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate F…

Raguvalika Trading Pvt Ltd ( Since Merged With M.M.Murarka Share & Securities Pvt Ltd), Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 849/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 848 To 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since Merged With M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 848 to 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since merged with M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCR 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 851/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata [PAN: AABM 7219 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate F…

Raguvalika Trading Pvt Ltd ( Since Merged With M.M.Murarka Share & Securities Pvt Ltd), Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 848/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 848 To 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since Merged With M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 848 to 850/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 Ruguvalika Trading Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata (Since merged with M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCR 5743 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 851/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M.M. Murarka Share & Securities Pvt. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata [PAN: AABM 7219 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate F…