CIT v. Neeraj Amidhar Surti

238 CTR 294High Court2011#20109 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. Neeraj Amidhar Surti

SMT. SWATIBEN ANILBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1513/AHD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ketan H. Shah with ShriFor Respondent: ITA Nos. 1513 to 1515/Ahd/19
Section 143(3)

…ncome resulting from sale of shares acquired from participation of borrowed funds as held in plethora of judicial decisions. A reference in this regard was made to the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neeraj Amidhar Sur [2011] 238 CTR 294 (Guj). 9.1 Adverting to the facts briefly, the learned counsel submitted that it is a matter of record that profit/gains of Rs.1,40,01,808/- in question arises from purchase and sale of shares of PSTL. The assessee has purchased 215802 shares of PSTL and sold 167000 shares giving rise to the impugned gains and remaining 48702 shares have remaine…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI VIJAY AASUMAL KESHWANI,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and affirm the action of the AO

ITA 1946/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1946/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1946/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Shri Vijay Aasumal बनाम/ Income Tax Keshwani Vs. Circle- 3(3), Ahmedabad 304, Ambience Tower, Nr. Judges Bunglows, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADGPK5207Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R. Shri G. C. Pipara,…

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

…r Ahmed Alladin and Sons v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh, [1968] 68 ITR 573 " Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur v M/s Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd., (1975) 100 ITR 706 (Supreme Court) " Commissioner of Income tax v Niraj Amidhar Surti (238 CTR 294) (HC-Gujarat) " Commissioner of Income Tax v Madan Gopal Radhey Lal, [1969] 73 ITR 652 (SC) " Income tax officer v Radha Birju Patel (ITAT - Mumbai) (ITA No.5382/Mum/ 2009) " Commissioner of Income tax v Trishul Investments Limited 305 ITR 434 (HC - Madras) " S Balan @ Shanmugam Balkrishnan Chettiar v Deputy Commissioner of Income tax [2009] 120…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. MOHAN GUPTA, HUF, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5835/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kambleay: 2008-09 Dcit, Circle 31(1) Vs. Mohan Gupta, Huf Room No.185 A 502, Nirmal Tower C.R.Bldg., I.P.Estate 26, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpg 9057 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Amrit Lal, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : Sh. Ved Jain, C.A.

For Appellant: Shri Amrit Lal, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Sh. Ved Jain, C.A

…he amounts paid for IPOs as investments and not as stock in trade. Separate registers were maintained for investments as well as for stock in trade. The Ld.CIT(A) relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neeraj Amidhar Surti 238 CTR 294 (Guj.) and came to a conclusion that despite borrowing, the gain on sale of shares can be capital gains and not business income. Moreover, the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2007-08 in ITA 1923/Del/2010 had allowed the appeal of the assessee ITA No. 5835/Del/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 Mohan Gupta, HUF, New Delhi by concurring with the L…

CIT v. Neeraj Amidhar Surti (238 CTR 294) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax