D.H. Securities Ltd. v. DCIT

Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(2)(2)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ACIT-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15th floor, Yes Bank Tower, IFC 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. PAN NO. AAACY 2068 D Appellant Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement ITA No. 3017/MUM/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. M/s Yes Bank Ltd., 9th floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery of India, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018. PAN NO. AAACY 2068 D Respondent : :…

ACIT - 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Acit-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15Th Floor, Yes Bank Tower, Ifc 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBΑΙ BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ACIT-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15th floor, Yes Bank Tower, IFC 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. PAN NO. AAACY 2068 D Appellant Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement ITA No. 3017/MUM/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. M/s Yes Bank Ltd., 9th floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery of India, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018. ΡΑΝ ΝΟ. AAACY 2068 D Respondent ITA N…

L & T Finance Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 L & T Finance Holdings Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(1), Brindavan Plot No. 177 Cst M.K. Road, New Marine Vs. Road, Kalina Santacruz Lines (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. Pan No. Aabcl 5046 R Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 L & T Finance Holdings Ltd., DCIT-2(2)(1), Brindavan Plot No. 177 CST M.K. Road, New Marine Vs. Road, Kalina Santacruz Lines (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. PAN NO. AABCL 5046 R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Jeet Kamdar Revenue by : Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 17/07/2023 : Date of pronouncement 24/07/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 04.02…

ITO 21(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Heena P. Chheda, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Ito – 21(1)(4), Smt. Heena P. Chheda, Room No. 108, 1St Floor, Ruby House, B Wing, Piramal Chamber, Parel, J.K. Sawant Marg, Mumbai - 400012 Vs. Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan: Addpc7587Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar (Dr) Assessee By : Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 06/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/10/2018

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The ITO – 21(1)(4), Smt. Heena P. Chheda, Room No. 108, 1st Floor, Ruby House, B Wing, Piramal Chamber, Parel, J.K. Sawant Marg, Mumbai - 400012 Vs. Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 PAN: ADDPC7587Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri V. Vidhyadhar (DR) Assessee by : Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi (AR) Date of Hearing: 06/07/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 05/10/2018 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 29/10/2015 pass…

Ihp Finvest Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Ihp Finvest Ltd., The Dcit, 2(2) Construction House, 2Nd Floor, 577, 5Th Floor, Walchand Hirachand Marg, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400001 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaaci5206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prasad Bapat (Ar) Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swarup (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 05/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2018

…the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not giving opportunity of hearing in case of enhancement of disallowance of expenses u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D(2)(iii), while relying upon the decision of Mumbai ITAT in the case of D.H. Securities P. Ltd. v/s DCIT [2014] 146 ITD 1. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in holding that the shares held by 3 Assessment Year: 2010-11 the appellant company as “Stock in trade” should also be included in the value of the average investments for the purpose of rule 8D, and consequently erred in directing the assessing officer to re…

ITO, WD -3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2330/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward-3(1)(1), M/S. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 666, 6Th Floor, 408, Tulsiyani Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabca 1755 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. V. Rajguru ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 19.01.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing That The Loss Of Rs.2,46,31,762/- On Account Of Derivative Trading Cannot Be Treated As Speculation Loss & Failed To Appreciate That The Case Of The Assessee Squarely Falls Within Ambit Of Explanation To S.73 Of The I.T. Act"

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “एल” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2330/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), M/s. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 666, 6th Floor, 408, Tulsiyani Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCA 1755 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri M. V. Rajguru ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख…

ACIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Oasis Securities Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Oasis Securities Ltd. The Asst. Commissioner 2Nd Floor, Bldg.No.5, Of Income Tax-Circle 4(2) Rajabahadur Compound, Mumbai Vs. Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaaco0091J The Deputy Commissioner Oasis Securities Ltd. Of Income Tax 4(2)(1), 2Nd Floor, Bldg.No.5, Room No. 642, 6Th Floor, Rajabahadur Compound, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 023 Appellant .. Respondent

…sallowance u/s 14A read with rule 3D has not reaching finality, there being catena of cases where decision is given favour of Revenue like - Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. 117 lTD 169, American Express Bank Ltd. 24 Taxmann.com 50, D.H. Securities Pvt. Ltd. 41 Taxmann.com 352 and Damani Estate & Finance Pvt. Ltd. 44 Taxmann.com 385.” Assessee has raised following ground No.1 “The Learned CIT(A) erred in not deleting addition made under Rule 8D(ii) of Rs.50,08,589/- & under Rule 8D(iii) of Rs.1,03,392/- of Sec.14A & directing AO to deduct the value of stock in trade for purposes of Rule 8D(iii) only & not for…

Oasis Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Oasis Securities Ltd. The Asst. Commissioner 2Nd Floor, Bldg.No.5, Of Income Tax-Circle 4(2) Rajabahadur Compound, Mumbai Vs. Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaaco0091J The Deputy Commissioner Oasis Securities Ltd. Of Income Tax 4(2)(1), 2Nd Floor, Bldg.No.5, Room No. 642, 6Th Floor, Rajabahadur Compound, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 023 Appellant .. Respondent

…sallowance u/s 14A read with rule 3D has not reaching finality, there being catena of cases where decision is given favour of Revenue like - Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. 117 lTD 169, American Express Bank Ltd. 24 Taxmann.com 50, D.H. Securities Pvt. Ltd. 41 Taxmann.com 352 and Damani Estate & Finance Pvt. Ltd. 44 Taxmann.com 385.” Assessee has raised following ground No.1 “The Learned CIT(A) erred in not deleting addition made under Rule 8D(ii) of Rs.50,08,589/- & under Rule 8D(iii) of Rs.1,03,392/- of Sec.14A & directing AO to deduct the value of stock in trade for purposes of Rule 8D(iii) only & not for…

Hinduja Ventures Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 302/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hinduja Ventures Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle 8(2), बनाम/ 49/50, In Centre, Midc, Aayakar Bhavan, 12Th Road, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaach 2058 N (Assessee) (Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 690/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dy. Cit, Circle 8(2), Hinduja Ventures Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 49/50, In Centre, Midc, 12Th Road, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 093 (Revenue) (Assessee) : Assessee By : Shri Hari S. Raheja : Mrs. Neelma Nadkarni Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 08.09.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 30.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 29.11.2013, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S

…the working by the assessee and the Revenue, i.e., with regard to the treatment of stock-in-trade; the assessee having excluded the same on the ground that it yields taxable income only. TheTribunal in the case of D. H. Securities (P.) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2014] 146 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM) and Dy. CIT vs. Damani Estates & Finance (P.) Ltd. [2013] 25 ITR (Trib) 683 (Mum), after an exhaustive analysis of the relevant provisions, and considering that the dividend as well as the long-term gain arising on the shares held as stock-in-trade, would yield primarily taxable income, restricted the same to 20% of the sum exigible for…

Jm Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…1 I.T.A. No.441/Mum/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.441/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) JM Financial Services Ltd vs The ACIT 4(3), Mumbai 7th Floor, Cnergy, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-25 PAN : AAACJ5977A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri K Shivram / Shri Sanjay Parekh Respondent by Arju Garodia Date of hearing : 15-09-2016 Date of pronouncement :21 -09-2016 O R D E R Per ASHWANI TANEJA, AM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the o…

Dcb Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No. 820/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 Dcb Bank Ltd., The Acit-Circle 2(3), बनाम/ Formerly Development Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Credit Bank Ltd., 6Th Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Peninsulla Business Park, Tower A, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013

…decision in the case of Rmkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT in ITA No. 6324/M/2012, decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs JCIT 250 CTR 291 and also the Third Member decision in the case of D.H. Securities Ltd. Vs DCIT 41 Taxmann.com 352. The relevant part of the decision of the Tribunal reads as under: We may observe that the issue relating to the disallowance under section 14A in relation to shares held in stock in trade was discussed by the co-ordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of “D.H. Securities (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT” (2014) 41 taxmann.com 352 and the matter w…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No. 820/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 Dcb Bank Ltd., The Acit-Circle 2(3), बनाम/ Formerly Development Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Credit Bank Ltd., 6Th Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Peninsulla Business Park, Tower A, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013

…decision in the case of Rmkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT in ITA No. 6324/M/2012, decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs JCIT 250 CTR 291 and also the Third Member decision in the case of D.H. Securities Ltd. Vs DCIT 41 Taxmann.com 352. The relevant part of the decision of the Tribunal reads as under: We may observe that the issue relating to the disallowance under section 14A in relation to shares held in stock in trade was discussed by the co-ordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of “D.H. Securities (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT” (2014) 41 taxmann.com 352 and the matter w…