CIT v. Tanubhai D. Desai

Philip Capital (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanphilip Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle 4(2) (Formerly Known As Mf Room No. 669, Global Sify Securities India Aayakar Bhavan Private Limited) No. 1, 18Th M.K. Road, Floor, Urmi Estate, 95 Vs. Mumbai – 20 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013

…hat the issue that an amount held by a person in a fiduciary capacity cannot be brought to tax as an unexplained credit u/s 68, is no more res integra in light of the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Tanubhai D. Desai (1972) 84 ITR 713 (Bom), wherein the Hon‟ble High Court after referring to the rights and regulations of solicitors, in respect of the amounts of their clients held by them in a fiduciary capacity, had observed as under:- “The relevant principle laid down by the House of Lords in its judgment in that case is that if a person in a fiduciary position receives any fin…

Phillip Capital (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

…that the issue that an amount held by a person in a fiduciary capacity cannot be brought to tax as an unexplained credit u/s 68, is no more res integra in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Tanubhai D. Desai(1972) 84 ITR 713 (Bom), wherein the Hon‟ble High Court after referring to the rights and regulations of solicitors, in respect of the amounts of their clients held by them in a fiduciary capacity, had observed as under:- “The relevant principle laid down by the House of Lords in its judgment in that case is that if a person in a fiduciary position receives any fin…

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner Income Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Maharashtra Industrial Deputy Commissioner Of Income Development Corporation Tax (Exemption)-2(1), बिधम/ Udyog Sarathi, Mahakali Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Caves Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 093 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaacm3560C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…tention relied on certain case laws viz. (i) Morley Vs. Tatter Stall (1939) 7 ITR 316 (CA); (ii) Brown Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners (1965) 57 ITR 729 (HL); (iii) Sandersons and Morgans Vs. CIT (1970) 75 ITR 433 (Cal); (iv) CIT Vs. Tanubhai D. Desai (1972) 84 ITR 713 (Bom); and (v) Gujarat Municipal Finance Board Vs. DCIT (1996) 221 ITR 317 (Guj). In the backdrop of the aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. A.R that as the government had only vested the possession of the lands with the assessee corporation, hence only a fiduciary relationship was created between the assessee corporation and the go…

Mf Global Sify Securities India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 4407/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Mf Global Sify Securities India Addl. Commissioner Of Private Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mf Income Tax- Range 4(2) बिधम/ Global Sify Securities India Private Limited); Room No. 669, Aayakar 2Nd Floor, Modern Centre, Block Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, C, Mahalaxmi-Mumbai. Mumbai- 400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6382C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Revenue) :

…ry capacity by way of trust money, could not be characterized as amounts held by the assessee for his own benefit and be assessed as the latters income, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Tanubhai D. Desai (1972) 84 ITR 713 (Bom). The ld. A.R further in support of the settled position of law that merely because an assessee does not offer any explanation for the cash credit entries, the amount solely for the said reason cannot be assessed as his income under Sec. 68, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Mitesh Rolling Mills (P) lt…