P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan v. CIT

Ashtavinayak Construction, Navi Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir. 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Ashtavinayaka Jcit Circle 22(3), Mumbai. Construction, Vs. Plot No. R-478, Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Rabale, Navi Mumbai- 400701. Pan No. Aadfa1724G Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Ashtavinayaka JCIT Circle 22(3), Mumbai. Construction, Vs. Plot No. R-478, TTC Industrial area, MIDC, Rabale, Navi Mumbai- 400701. PAN No. AADFA1724G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Bhadresh Doshi, AR Revenue by : Mr. S.K. Mishra, DR Date of Hearing : 12/07/2019 Date of pronouncement : 30/09/2019 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2010-11. The appeal is directed agai…

Atul Arun Kasbekar, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal in ITA no

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

…n support of his contention, the learned Departmental Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) Sumati Dayal v/s CIT, [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC); ii) ACIT v/s Faiz Murtaza Ali, [2012] 52 SOT 358 (Del.); iii) P.M. Mohammad Meerakhan v/s CIT, [1969] 73 ITR 735 (SC); iv) Mazagaon dock Ltd. v/s CIT, [1958] 34 ITR 368 (SC); & v) H.H. Maharaja Rana Hemant Singhji v/s CIT, [1976] 103 ITR 61 (SC). 6 Atul Arun Kesabekar 6. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. The dispute lies within a narrow compass as to whether the income derived from sale of paintings is to be treated as cap…

Malini Agarwalla, Mumbai vs. DCIT 12(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2161/Mum/2013 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) बनधम/ Mrs.Malini Agarwalla, Dcit-12(3), Aayakar Bahvan, 44-A, Mittal Tower, Vs. M K Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan :Aadpa3396G अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Appellant By Shri Pankaj Jain प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Suman Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.1.2017 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :2..2.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M:

…lck Larsen, 160 ITR 67(SC) been held that the question whether the transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether they were in the nature of investment is a mixed question of law and facts. In the case of P .M.Mohd. Meerakhan 73 ITR 735 (SC), it has been held that the answer whether a transaction is adventure in the nature of trade or not must necessarily depend in each case on the total impression and the effect of the relevant factors and circumstances. 2.6 It is well settled that the intention at the time of purchases is the most important factor to decide whether the purchase…

Sanjay J Ahuja, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Ramlal Negishri Sanjay J. Ahuja, 202, Flat No.11, Shahnaj Building, New New India Bank, S.V.Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan:Adepa 2739H ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer 19(3)(4), Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai 400 011 .... Respondent

…d purchased the property. It was submitted that the matter before us was identical and a similar conclusion was required to be reached. The Supreme Court had occasion to consider a similar question in a later decision in P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan vs. CIT (1969) 73 ITR 735 (SC) : TC12R.383. It has been observed in the 5 aforesaid decision that it is not possible to evolve any single legal test or formula which can be applied in determining whether a transaction is an adventure in the nature of trade or not. The answer to the question must necessarily depend in each case on the total impression and effect of all the…

Religare Technova Global Solutions Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

…s a self-contained 14 accounting period and one can only take into consideration income, profits and gains made in that year and not potential profits which may be made in another year.' Also the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan v. CIT [1969] 73 ITR 735 has held that : 'Under the IT Act for the purpose of assessment each year is a self- contained unit and in the case of a trading adventure the profits have to be computed in the manner provided by the statute.' Therefore, there is no merit in the contention of the ld. counsel that the aforesaid advance/unearned revenue of Rs. 1,02,33,944/- has b…

A.C.I.T. Circle 21(1), Mumbai vs. Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

…he character of transaction; and so, though we may attempt to derive some assistance from decisions bearing on this point, we cannot seek to deduce any rule from them and mechanically apply it to the facts before us " . Similarly in case of PM Mohd Mirza Khan 73 ITR 735(SC) it has been held that the answer whether a transaction is adventure in nature of trade or not, must necessarily depend on each case on the total impression and the effect of the relevant factors and circumstances. In case of V Nagesh (ITA No5410/mum/2008) on page 5 of the order the Hon'ble ITAT while holding that sale and purchase of shares fr…

Mohan Kapoorchand Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed in part where as appeal of revenue in assessment 2009-2010 is dismissed

…he character of transaction; and so, though we may attempt to derive some assistance from decisions bearing on this point, we cannot seek to deduce any rule from them and mechanically apply it to the facts before us " . Similarly in case of PM Mohd Mirza Khan 73 ITR 735(SC) it has been held that the answer whether a transaction is adventure in nature of trade or not, must necessarily depend on each case on the total impression and the effect of the relevant factors and circumstances. In case of V Nagesh (ITA No5410/mum/2008) on page 5 of the order the Hon'ble ITAT while holding that sale and purchase of shares fr…