CIT v. Karamchand Premchand Ltd.

40 ITR 106Supreme Court of India1960#6492 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also reported as

3 SCR 727

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 70 Section 71 Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(39A)Section 45

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 4(1)section 74 section 10(33)section 71 section 47 section 70 transfer of capital asset section 2(14)principal officer section 48 section 45

Judgments citing CIT v. Karamchand Premchand Ltd.

SAHARA INDIA CORP INVESTMENT LTD,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as above

ITA 1750/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.1750/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Sahara India Corp Investment Assistant Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, I-Kapoorthala Complex, Vs. Central Circle–1, Aliganj, Lucknow, Up Jhandewalan, New Delhi Pan: Aaacs1707R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocate Sh. Arpit Goyal, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal For The Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2017-18 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.06.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

…ding of the Ld. CIT(A). Alternatively, he contended that the said assessed capital loss should be allowed to be carried forward to subsequent years. In support of this argument, he placed reliance on the following decisions:  Karanchand Premchand Ltd: [1960] 40 ITR 106 (SC)  Royal Calcutta Turf Club: 144 ITR 709 (Cal)  Raptakos Brett & Co Ltd.: [2015] 69 SOT 383 (Mum)  Shiv Kumar Jatia: ITA 7256/Del/2019 (Del Trib) 6. Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Emphasizing on the accounting treatment of shares of M/s. PDOECL given by the assessee in its regular book…

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…in 367 ITR 261 (Guj) had indeed taken a contrary view and the said decision is per incuriam and hence not a binding precedent inasmuch as the same has not considered the fundamental law laid down in CIT vs Karamchand Premchand Ltd of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in 40 ITR 106 (SC) and decision of Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court referred supra. f) Capital gains arising on transfer of equity shares and equity oriented mutual funds is exempt only if the share is in the nature of long-term capital asset; such shares are transferred on the stock exchange and the transaction of sale of shares is subjected to levy of STT. Hence,…

NAGESH BABU VALIVETI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Bles & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.9/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13) Nagesh Babu Valiveti, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vijayawada. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Accpv7063J Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 30/04/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…1A) of IT Act. The Ld. DR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Considering the Hon’ble Supreme court decision in CIT Vs.Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192 (SC) and CIT Vs. Karamchand Premchand Ltd (1960) 40 ITR 106, we are also of the view that the decision favourable to the assessee is required to be taken. Accordingly following the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court we hold that reasonable period is 4 years for initiating of proceedings u/s 201/201(1A). In the instant case the property was registered on 18.7.2007 and the assessee is liable to deduct the…

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

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

ITA 1213/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…ome eligible to be carried forward to subsequent years as per the provisions of the Act. 7. The ld AR before us rightly placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of 3 judges in the case of CIT vs Karamchand Premchand Ltd reported in 40 ITR 106 (SC). In the facts before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the question of applicability of provisions of section 5 of the Business Profits Tax Act 1947 was subjected to consideration and applicability of the Act to business outside British India was considered. In that case, the assessee had business in British India and also a pharmaceutical business…

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

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

ITA 1212/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 4/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 3/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

RITA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR.2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 2(14)Section 45Section 45(1)Section 47

…f Club vs. CIT in [144 ITR 709 (Cal)]. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court while passing the above order has considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. KaramchandPremchand Ltd. in [1960] 40 ITR 106 (SC). The Ld. A.R distinguished the decisions as relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) while passing the appellate order and submitted that the decision in the case of Harprasad& Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra), CIT vs. J. H Gotla (supra), CIT vs. Coin health Food Pvt. Ltd. (supra) , were rendered under different facts except the decision of coordinate benches in t…

SHIVAM BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 317/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 317/Ahd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shivam Builders Private Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम Limited Income Tax Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, Rajvi Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Arcade, Nr. Gurukul Drive In Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs0296D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/04/2024 09/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.07.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal:

For Respondent: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…it is discernible that the words "income" or "profits and gains" should be understood as including losses also, so that, in one sense "profits and gains" represent "plus income" whereas losses represent "minus income" CIT v. Karamchand Prem Chand Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 106 ; [1960] 3 SCR 72. In other words, loss is negative profit. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of the taxable income of the assessee. 10. In the subsequent decision of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC), it was…

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 380/PUN/2020[2016/17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…assessee w7as entitled to set off the losses arising from the business of livestock breeding against income from other sources. 11. In holding so, the Court relied on the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Ltd. (i960) (40 ITR 106). In that case, the assessee, which held the managing agency of a company in British India also carried on a pharmaceutical business outside British India. During the relevant year, it earned profit in the managing agency business but incurred losses in the pharmaceutical business. The question w7as whether in ascertaining the business profits of…

ADABALA MANMOHAN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/VIZ/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.135/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Mr. Adabala Manmohan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Vpnao 1959 G Visakhapatnam. (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR

Section 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234B

THE SECUNDERBAD CLUB ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD -10(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 166/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.Jeevanlal, DR

Section 143(3)

…s discernible that the words 'income' or 'profits and gains' should be understood as including losses also, so that, in one sense 'profits and gains' represent 'plus income' whereas losses represent 'minus income', * in CIT v. Karamchand Premchand Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 106; [1960] 3 SCR 727 (SC) and CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. and Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 142; [1960] 3 SCR 953 (SC). other words, loss is negative profit. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of the taxable income of the assessee. Although se…

M/S. APPOLO TYRES LTD. vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

ITA/216/2013HC Kerala03 Aug 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 70(3)

…of income. The case on hand deals with income under the head ‘capital gains’. The assessee under this head has two sources of income; firstly, from the sale of equity shares and units in mutual funds which are long term 1 (1982) 144 ITR 100 (Ker.) 2 (1960) 40 ITR 106 (SC) 3 (1975) 99 ITR 118 (SC) 4 (2014) 367 ITR 261 (Guj.) I.T.A. No.216/2013 -10- capital assets and the sale was subjected to STT; secondly, sale of land held for more than three years and is in the nature of long term capital gain. The sources now clubbed together are distinct and separate. The first source, namely income from the sale of…

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1248/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143

…ative and positive income and the mandate of the legislature has to apply to both in similar manner. The assessee supported his contention before him relying on the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT versus Karamchand Premchand Ltd (1960) 40 ITR 106 and of the honourable Calcutta High Court in case of Royal Calcutta Turf club versus CIT (1983) 144 ITR 709. The learned CIT – A held that both these decisions are not applicable to the facts of the case. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Thus, assessee is in appeal before us. 14. Assessee has raised three sub grounds in only one…

NETESOFT INDIA LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -10(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution

ITA 5359/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5359/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2013-14) Netesoft India Limited Dcit-Central Circle-10(3)(1) 602, Maker Bhavan-Iii बनाम/ Room No.212, Aaykar Bhavan New Marin Lines Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacn-9543-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Yogesh Thar-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Samatha Mullamudi-Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 30/09/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 20/12/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year [Ay] 2013-14 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No. Cit(A)-17/It-480/15- 16 Dated 02/05/2017 On Following Sole Ground Of Appeal: -

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Samatha Mullamudi-Ld.Sr.DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 45Section 70

…taxmann.com 333 (Mum. -Trib.) considering the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT(Central) v. Harprasad and Co. (P.) Ltd. [1975] 99 ITR 118 (SC) and referring the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karamchand Premchand Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 106 (SC) and of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Royal Calcutta Turf Club v. CIT [1983] 144 1TR 709 (Cal.), the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT has held that – "The income by way of capital gains in the instant case is, by virtue of being exempt under section 10(38) not chargeable under section 45 and, consequently, outside the scope of the total in…

ADDALA CHANTI, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 887/HYD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt Neeju Gupta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 272A(2)(C)Section 272A(2)(c)Section 285

…1A) of IT Act. The Ld. DR relied on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Considering the Hon‟ble Supreme court decision in CIT Vs.Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192 (SC) and CIT Vs. Karamchand Premchand Ltd (1960) 40 ITR 106, we are also of the view that the decision favourable to the assessee is required to be taken. Accordingly following the decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court we hold that reasonable period is 4 years for initiating of proceedings u/s 201/201(1A). In the instant case the property was registered on 18.7.2007 and the assessee is liable to deduct the…

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 471/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Rustogi, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Saurav Kumar, JCIT

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…ncome' or 'profits and gains' should be understood as including losses also, so that, in one sense 'profits and gains' 12 M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. represent 'plus income' whereas losses represent' minus income'[CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Ltd. 1960) 40 ITR 106 (SC) ,CIT vs. Elphinstone Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co.Ltd. (1960) 40 ITR 142 (SC)]. In other words, loss is negative profit, both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of taxable income of the assessee." 6.2 On the other hand, Ld. DR for the Revenue has…

VIBHADEEP INVESTMENT & TRADING LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (OSD) 3(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 4751/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. Vibhadeep Investments & Acit (Osd)-3(3) Trading Limited Room No. 620 Vs. Mafatlal House, Backbay Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Reclamation, Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacv1946M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Arati VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…s observations and findings of the Hon’ble High Court and also the reliance placed by their Lordships to 5 M/s. Vibhadeep Investments & Trading Ltd. various decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, especially in the case of CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Ltd. (1960) 40 ITR 106. He also referred to various observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court from the said decision. Thus, he submitted that the losses on account of sale of shares should be allowed to be set off against Long term capital gain on sale of land. In his fairness, he also pointed out before us that there is a decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case…