CIT v. Nirmal Kumar & Co.

161 ITR 413High Court1986#13577 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. Nirmal Kumar & Co.

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

…panies in which some brokerage was earned and in some other loss or profit is earned. The entire business activity is inter linked and is to be treated as same activity. I am of the opinion that the case referred by the ld.A.R being CIT Vs. Nirmal Kumar & Co. 161 ITR 413 (Cal) is fully applicable in the present case. The addition of Rs.10,06,974/- under the head deemed speculation by applying the explanation to section 73 is, therefore deleted.” “Similarly, in case of M/s. Somany Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata, ITA No. 1914/Kol/2004, it was held that:- “The assessee comp…

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

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

…placed on the following decisions : • Ms. Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 651 (SC). 21 M/s Progressive Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd. • CIT v. U. P. State Industrial Development Corporation [1997] 225 ITR 703 (SC). • CIT v. Nirmal Kumar and Co. [1986] 161 ITR 413 (Cal). • Dr. Rajesh M. Parikh v. ITO [2006] 8 SOT 61 (Mumbai). • Chirag D. Tanna v. Asst. CIT (I. T. A. Nos. 4227 and 5027/ Mum/2010, dated March 14, 2012). In view of the above the loss on purchase and sale of shares independently but to consider it is an integral part of the arbitrage operations. As there in no loss from arbitrage operations…

JM FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly dismissed. However, in view of our findings given above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 3654/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. J.M. Financial Services The Joint Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax (Osd)-4(3), (Formerly Jm Financial Room No.635, Services Pvt. Ltd.), Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 7Th Floor, Cnergy, M.K. Road, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 Pan: Aaacj5977A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri, D.R

Section 14A

…ng decisions: • Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia v CIT [1967] 63 ITR 651 (SC) • CIT v UP State Industrial Development Corporation [1997) 225 ITR 703 (SC) 23 ITA No.3654/M/2014 & ITA No.3660/M/2014 M/s. J.M. Financial Services Ltd. • CIT v Nirmal Kumar & Co. [1986] 161 ITR 413 (Cal) • Dr. Rajesh M. Parikh v ITO [2006] 8 SOT 61 (Mum ITAT) • ChiragTanna v ACIT (ITA No 4227 and 5027/Mum/2010) In view of the above the loss on purchase and sale of shares independently but to consider it is an integral part of the arbitrage operations. As there in no loss from arbitrage operations, the question of applying section 43(5) or E…

ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. FORTUNE INTERFINANCE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2064/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 43(5)Section 73

…anies in which some brokerage was earned and in some other loss or profit is earned. The entire business activity is inter linked and is to be treated as same activity. I am of the opinion that the case referred by the ld. A.R being CIT Vs. Nirmal Kumar & Co. 161 ITR 413 (Cal) is fully applicable in the present case. The addition of Rs.10,06,974/- under the head deemed speculation by applying the explanation to section 73 is, therefore deleted.” “Similarly, in case of M/s. Somany Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata, ITA No. 1914/Kol/2004, it was held that:- “The assessee com…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

ITA 852/KOL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 43(5)Section 73

…in some of which brokerage was earned and in some others loss or profit is earned. The entire business activity is inter linked and is to be treated as same activity. I am of the opinion that the case referred by the Id. A.R. being CIT-vs.- Nirmal Kumar & Co. 161 ITR 413 (Cal.) is fully applicable in the present case. The addition of Rs.10,06,974/- under the head deemed speculation by applying the explanation to section 73 is, therefore, deleted". During the course of hearing, the Id. Departmental Representative has not disputed the above facts as stated by the Id. CIT(A). We also observe that the income of the…

LOHIA SECURITIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 487/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 487/Kol/2012 A.Y 2008-09 M/S. Lohia Securities Ltd Vs. Dcit, Circle-6, Kolkata Pan: Aaacl 5834A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Kumar Patni, CA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, ld.DR

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

…ompany or a company whose principal business is banking or money lending. The learned Tribunal has, therefore, affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) in view of the judgment of this Court [CIT vs. Nirmal Kumar & Co.] (supra) reported in 161 ITR 413. In view of the aforesaid findings and application of law in this matter we do not think it is a fit case for admission. It is not submitted that the decision rendered in the case of [CIT vs.Nirmal Kumar & Co.] reported in 161 ITR 413 (Supra) is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case nor it is argued that the said decision of…