ITO v. V.R.M. Share Broking Pvt. Ltd.

27 SOT 469Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#20324 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing ITO v. V.R.M. Share Broking Pvt. Ltd.

DJS STOCK & SHARES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 648/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Section 37(1)

…have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that a similar issue had come up for consideration before the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. V.R.M. Share Broking Pvt. Ltd., 27 SOT 469 wherein it was held that the penalty for failure of margins imposed by SEBI on share brokers by various notifications being risk management oriented, payment towards such penalty does not attract proviso to section 37(1) which is aimed at providing deterrence for infraction of laws of the country. To the similar effect in the decision of Chandigar…

OGENE SYSTEMS INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 271/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 37

…/JP/2017 DCIT Vs. M/s Agribiotech Industries Ltd. legitimate business expense of the assessee, though technically, it may be called penalty. • Prakash Cotton Mills Private Limited -vs.- CIT (1993) 201 ITR 684 (SC) • ITO -vs.- VRM Share Broking (P) Ltd. (2009) 27 SOT 469 (Mum) • Master Capital [2008] 23 SOT 60 5.2 I have carefully considered the assessment order, facts of the case, submissions and case laws relied upon by the appellant. Since the appellant has not done any business and no income or loss earned. As per the agreement, since the appellant failed to do the same and not fulfilled the conditions, hence…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NATIONAL CABLE INDUSTRIES, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4145/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 4145/Del/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…Ltd. vs. DCIT 129 TTJ 49 f) Vishwanath V. Kale vs. ITO ITA 2081/2010 (Mum) g) Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 201 ITR 684 (SC) h) ACIT vs. Taurian Iron and Steel Co. Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1613/Mum/2010) i) ITO vs. VRM Share Broking (P) Ltd. (2009) 27 SOT 469 (Mum) Thus, Explanation to section 37(1) is to be invoked only in those circumstances when there is really a breach of any law like penalty imposed under State VAT Act for non-filing of return, etc. and not in present case. 14 The above-mentioned decisions lay down the fact that payments which are compensatory in nature should not be disallowed…

DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PRANAV SECURITIES P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1144/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

For Appellant: Ms.Mahua Sarkar

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…to brokers and sub-brokers stipulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India with reference to which penalties are levied by Disciplinary Action Bench of National Stock Exchange.  The Hon'ble Murnbai Tribunal in the case of VRM Share Broking (P) Ltd, 27 SOT 469 it was held that: "From the perusal of various notifications issued by SEBI, it was apparent that they were issued mainly in the context of the risk management, rather than as a penal provision for punishing the defaulters or deeming the transactions illegal. In view of the same, it was opined that with or without the provisions of margin money th…