(i) Bank of America NT & SA v. DCIT

M/S. STANDARD CHARTED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT SP. RG 27, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

…ions are treated as illegal, the loss arising there from is allowable as deduction under the provisions of the Act. In this regard, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench in the case of Bank of America vs. DCIT (2009)(27 SOT 97)(Mum), wherein it was held that even though the assessee has executed security transactions which are in violation of the provisions of section 15 of the Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956, loss arising from the said illegal transaction is allowable as deduction under the provisions of the Act. The Ld A.R submitted that the Tribunal has fol…

THE DDIT (I.T)2(1) vs. M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

…ions are treated as illegal, the loss arising there from is allowable as deduction under the provisions of the Act. In this regard, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench in the case of Bank of America vs. DCIT (2009)(27 SOT 97)(Mum), wherein it was held that even though the assessee has executed security transactions which are in violation of the provisions of section 15 of the Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956, loss arising from the said illegal transaction is allowable as deduction under the provisions of the Act. The Ld A.R submitted that the Tribunal has fol…

CREDIT AGRICOLE CORPORATE AND INVESTMENT BANK (FORMERLY CALYON BANK, ERSTWHILE CREDIT AGRICOLE INDOSUEZ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (IT) RG 1, MUMBAI

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

…s.37 of (1) of the Act. He relied upon the cases of Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd (262 ITR 55),American Express Bank Ltd (138 ITD 288), American Express Bank Ltd (ITXA 1294 of 2013), British Bank of Middle East (4 SOT 122) (Mum),Bank of America NT & SA v DCIT (27 SOT 97). The DR supported the order of the FAA and stated that 6.3.We have perused the invoices,statement of expenditure received by the assessee during the year from its sister concerns (Pgs 83 to 103 and (Pgs 111 to 118) of the PB. The invoices talks of software maintenance,various-stems-items,duration etc.These documents also gives details of allocatio…

DDIT (IT) 2(2), MUMBAI vs. UBS AG, MUMBAI

In the result, revenue’s appeal as well as assessee’s Cross

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Amit Shuklaita

…ted in [2012] 343 ITR 81. The list of decision relied upon before us are as under:- Case Law Citation 1 ABN Amro Bank NV(2011) 198 Taxman.376(Cal) 2 Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corpn [2012] 136 ITD 66 Vs DCIT (Mumbai Tribunal) 3 Bank of America NT & SA vs [2005] 27 SOT 97 DCIT Mumbai ITAT) 4 British Bank of Middle East vs [2005] 4 SOT 122 JCIT (Mumbai ITAT) 5 Biocon Limited vs DCIT [2013] 35 taxmann.com 355 (Bang ITAT SB) 15 M/s UBS AG CO 210/Mum/2015 14. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the impugned order of the AO as well as CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) has allowed only ESOP costs incu…