Gopal Purohit v. JCIT

29 SOT 117Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#3629 most cited

What is Gopal Purohit v. JCIT authority for?

The revenue is debarred from taking inconsistent stands on similar facts across different assessment years, adhering to the rule of consistency. Short-term capital gains are assessable under the head 'Capital Gains' only.

33

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Gopal Purohit v. JCIT · rule of consistency · income tax · assessment years · flickering stands · short term capital gains · capital gains · investment · business income · delivery based transactions

Judgments citing Gopal Purohit v. JCIT

Oceanic Marketing Agencies India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -2(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA No. 4542/Mum/2025 is dismissed as

ITA 4777/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

…7 ITR 4 (Gau) In the context of the dispute whether the share transactions resulted in trading profit or capital gains, the rule of consistency has been applied in the following two decisions of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal: (Gopal Purohit vs.Jt. CIT/2009/20 DTR 99(Mumbai Trib.) Janak S. Rangwala vs. ACIT/2007] 11 SOT 627 (Mumbai) Following the rule of consistency, the Tribunal in above cases, accepted the assessee's contention that assessee was investor in shares and not trader because in the earlier years, the Revenue had accepted that the assessee was investor. In Janak Rangawala's case (Supra), the Tribun…

M/S. Oceanic Marketing Agencies India Ltd., Delhi vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, (OSD), Circle 2(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA No. 4542/Mum/2025 is dismissed as

ITA 4542/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

…ITR 4 (Gau) In the context of the dispute whether the share transactions resulted in trading profit or capital gains, the rule of consistency has been applied in the following two decisions of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal: (Gopal Purohit vs.Jt. CIT/2009/20 DTR 99(Mumbai Trib.) Janak S. Rangwala vs. ACIT/2007] 11 SOT 627 (Mumbai) Following the rule of consistency, the Tribunal in above cases, accepted the assessee's contention that assessee was investor in shares and not trader because in the earlier years, the Revenue had accepted that the assessee was investor. In Janak Rangawala's case (Supra), the Tribu…

DCIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Posco India Pune Processing Center Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1002/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1001 and 1002/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 and 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-8, Vs. Posco India Pune Processing Pune Center Private Limited, Plot No.A9, Talegaon MIDC, Floriculture Park, Umbre Navlakh, B.O.Umbre Navlakh, Pune 410507, Maharashtra PAN : AADCP7555R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent Cross Objection Nos.29 and 30/PUN/2024 (Arising out ITA Nos. 1001 and 1002/PUN/2024) Assessment Year : 2010-11 and 2011-12 Posco India Pun…

DCIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Posco India Pune Processing Center Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1001/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1001 and 1002/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 and 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-8, Vs. Posco India Pune Processing Pune Center Private Limited, Plot No.A9, Talegaon MIDC, Floriculture Park, Umbre Navlakh, B.O.Umbre Navlakh, Pune 410507, Maharashtra PAN : AADCP7555R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent Cross Objection Nos.29 and 30/PUN/2024 (Arising out ITA Nos. 1001 and 1002/PUN/2024) Assessment Year : 2010-11 and 2011-12 Posco India Pun…

ACIT-Central Circle -2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Nandkumar Khattumal Harchandani, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 411/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.411/Nag./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–2(1), Nagpur v/s Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani ……………. Respondent 469, Poonam Villa, New Colony Nagpur 440 013 PAN – AATPH2594R Assessee by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 21/01/2025 Date of Order – 25/02/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order date…

ACIT-Central Circle -2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Nandkumar Khattumal Harchandani, Nagpur

ITA 410/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.410/Nag./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur v/s Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani Respondent 469, Poonam Villa, New Colony Nagpur 440 013 PAN – AATPH2594R Assessee by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 21/01/2025 Date of Order – 25/02/2025 PER K.M. ROY, A.M. ORDER This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order dated 31/10/2019, passed by…

Asstt. CIT, Cir- 7, Nagpur vs. M/S. Newquest Corporation Ltd., Chandrapur

ITA 328/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S.Newquest Corporation Ltd. Circle-7, (Now Known As M/S. Avantha Nagpur Holding Ltd. Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur Pan No.:Aabcb 6134 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 40

…t of shares were held for a very short period of time while in the year under consideration, the appellant has entered into a limited number of transactions and has held the shares for years. 5.1 The Hon’ble ITAT also relied on the case of GopalPurohitvs JCIT 20 DTR 99 (supra) wherein it has been held that the appellant’s claim for short term and long term capital gain from the transaction in shares have been allowed on identical facts in earlier assessment years and that therefore the same could not be disallowed in the year under consideration only because the transaction conferred certain benefits of the appel…

Tikuchand Durgaji Jogani, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 17 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-

ITA 6798/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Tikuchand Durgaji Jogani, The Acit-17(3), 301, Gundecha Chambers, Room No. 137, N.M. Road, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mumbai - 400023 Vs. Road, Pan: Aaapj8019Q Mumbai - 400020

For Appellant: Shri Ashok J. Patil (AR)For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh (DR)
Section 143Section 14ASection 234ASection 271

…of CIT Vs. Dineshbhai C. Patel (supra). It is not denied that the facts involved in this case in the case of Dineshbhai C. Patel (supra) are similar to the facts in the case of the assessee. Similarly, the facts involved in the case of Gopal Purohit Vs. JC1T 20 DTR 99 (Mumbai) were also the same as in the case of the assessee. In all those cases, the Tribunal took the view that period of holding cannot be the basis to determine whether the share transaction entered into by the assessee is a business income or capital gain. In this case also, we noted that the assessing officer has built up his case mainly on the…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result ITA no. 3717/Mum/2015 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and ITA no

ITA 3717/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 88E

…yet in view of rule of consistency, in our opinion, the revenue is debarred from taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010.” 3. The Tribunal quoted from this decision and theafter the Tribunal concluded as under :- “Therefore, on the facts and circumstances of the cas…

Star Internaitonal Movies Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (It) 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1637/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1519/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Channel V Music Networks Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax(International Limited Taxation)- 2(1)(1) Partnership V. Scindia House, C/O Star India Private Ltd., Mumbai- 400038 Star House, Urmi Estate, 95, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaefc6136H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri. Pavan K Beerla (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 253Section 92C

…levant to Income-tax matters and Assessing Officer cannot be ignore the same. There ought to be uniformity in treatment and consistency when the facts and circumstances are identical as held by the Mumbai Tribunal in Gopal Purohit v. Jt. CIT (2009] 122 TTJ 87/29 SOT 117." • Kuehne Nagel Private Limited vs. ACTT (ITA No. 5648/Del/2010) "4.34. The Department has accepted assesses working of international transactions at an arms length for assessment years A Y 2003-04, A Y 2004-05 and A Y 2005-06 and also the next two assessment years AY 2007-08 and AY 2008-09. Therefore, a different treatment can not be given to as…

Channel Music Networks Ltd Partnership, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1519/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1519/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Channel V Music Networks Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax(International Limited Taxation)- 2(1)(1) Partnership V. Scindia House, C/O Star India Private Ltd., Mumbai- 400038 Star House, Urmi Estate, 95, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaefc6136H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri. Pavan K Beerla (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 253Section 92C

…levant to Income-tax matters and Assessing Officer cannot be ignore the same. There ought to be uniformity in treatment and consistency when the facts and circumstances are identical as held by the Mumbai Tribunal in Gopal Purohit v. Jt. CIT (2009] 122 TTJ 87/29 SOT 117." • Kuehne Nagel Private Limited vs. ACTT (ITA No. 5648/Del/2010) "4.34. The Department has accepted assesses working of international transactions at an arms length for assessment years A Y 2003-04, A Y 2004-05 and A Y 2005-06 and also the next two assessment years AY 2007-08 and AY 2008-09. Therefore, a different treatment can not be given to as…

ACIT 33(3), Mumbai vs. Rekha Khandelwal, Mumbai

In the result the revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection are dismissed

ITA 3257/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ramlal Negiआयकर अपील सुं./I.T.A. No.3257/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 बिाम/ Acit-33(3), Smt. Rekha Khandelwal, R.No. 607, 6 Th Floor, C-12, A-2703/04, Oberai Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Woods, Goregoan (E) V. Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400057 400051 स्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan:Abtpk4148D

For Appellant: Shri. Neelkanth Khandelwal (AR)For Respondent: Shri. Nishant Samaiya (DR)
Section 143(3)

…The matter travelled before CIT(A). The issue was decided in favour of the appellant by my predecessor who has allowed the claim of the short term capital gain of the assessee by following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gopal Purohit reported in 29 SOT 117, which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, and held that the delivery based transactions are to be treated as investment and income therefrom is to be taxed as short term or long term capital gain and not business income as held by the AO. This matter further travelled to the ITAT. The Hon'ble Mumbai TV BENCH ITAT in its o…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3758/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Dr. A.L. Sainil&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacl8668G V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai L&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacl8668G V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala a/wFor Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh a/w

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER L&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 PAN – AAACL8668G v/s Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai L&T Finance Ltd. Taxation Department L&T House, N.M. Marg ……………. Appellant Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 PAN – AAACL8668G v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri M.M. Golvala a/w Shri Akram Khan Revenue by : Shri H.N. Singh a/w…

ACIT -3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Golden Life Finacial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3053/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singha C I T - 3(1)(2) M/S. Golden Life Financial Room No. 607, 6Th Floor Services Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan (Formerly Lifeline Inusrance Vs. Distribution Co. Pvt. Ltd.) Mumbai 400020 125-B, Mittal Court, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacl8998D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajat MittalFor Respondent: Ms. Krupa Gandhi
Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…alance sheet. Further, it is seen that the investment has received a dividend of Rs. 4,69,605/- during the year. In fact, this is the amount that was subject of ground no. 1 above. 5.2.6 I find the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in Gopal Purohit vs JCIT, 29 SOT 117 (Mum) is applicable in the instant case. In that case, it was held that delivery based transactions should be treated as of nature of investment transactions. Similar view has been upheld by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the same case in ITA 1121 of 2009 cited in 188 Taxman 140 (Bom)(2010). 5.2.7 The AO has not offered any cogent reason either in t…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Larsen & Toubro Finance Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4459/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…yet in view of rule of consistency, in our opinion, the revenue is debarred from taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010. The relevant portion of Tribunal’s order is extracted below for ease of reference:- ITA Nos.3980-3982 &4459/Mum/2013 L & T Finance Limited Asse…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3982/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…yet in view of rule of consistency, in our opinion, the revenue is debarred from taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010. The relevant portion of Tribunal’s order is extracted below for ease of reference:- ITA Nos.3980-3982 &4459/Mum/2013 L & T Finance Limited Asse…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3981/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…yet in view of rule of consistency, in our opinion, the revenue is debarred from taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010. The relevant portion of Tribunal’s order is extracted below for ease of reference:- ITA Nos.3980-3982 &4459/Mum/2013 L & T Finance Limited Asse…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3980/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…yet in view of rule of consistency, in our opinion, the revenue is debarred from taking flickering stands on similar facts in different assessment years. Our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in Gopal Purohit Vs. JCIT [29 SOT 117] as confirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit [336 ITR 287]. Further the SLP of the department against the same has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 15/11/2010. The relevant portion of Tribunal’s order is extracted below for ease of reference:- ITA Nos.3980-3982 &4459/Mum/2013 L & T Finance Limited Asse…

Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5845/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 133(6)

…ing that their claim as an investor has been accepted in the preceding year. Inter alia, the ld. AR relied upon decision dated 6-1-2010 in CIT v. Gopal Purohit [2010] 188 Taxman 140 (Bom.), upholding decision of the Tribunal in Gopal Purohit v. Jt. CIT [2009] 29 SOT 117 (Mum). ITA No. 5845/Del./2014 10 5. We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of the case as also the aforesaid decisions relied upon by both the sides. The issue before us is as to whether the shares quoted in stock exchange and traded in by the assessee , which were classified as "investment" in their books of account, were the…

ACIT 13(2), Mumbai vs. Anand Gupta HUF, Mumbai

ITA 2073/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 143

…which shows that the shares were invested for capital gains and also dividend income was earned on quite a few shares.It referred to the CBDT Circular No. 4 of 2007 dated 16-06-2007 and relied upon the cases of V. Nagesh (ITA No. 5410/Mum/2008)Gopal Purohit (20 DTR 99). The FAA after considering the assessment order and the submissions of the assessee held that the holding period in the assessee's case in most of the shares was for the period of 180 days to 365 days than the period from one to 180 days,that the day-wise holding of share was more than 50% in respect of share from 180 to 365 days,that the transact…

Gopal Purohit v. JCIT (29 SOT 117) — Cited in 33 Judgments | BharatTax