Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

41 ITD 469Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#6497 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2021.

Judgments citing Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

PANTHER INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O. - 2(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1080/MUM/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi
Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 70Section 73Section 79

…income so computed comprise mainly of income under the heads other than business, then the question of applicability of the Explanation does not arise. Reliance is placed on the following decisions of Tribunals upholding the aforesaid view:– Rajan Enterprises 41 ITD 469 (Bom.) M. Gulab Singh & Sons 43 ITD 208 (Chd) Bloom Trading Co. P. Ltd. ITA no.6229/Bom./91 Further, section 73 comes into play only after income has been computed under various heads of income as defined in section 14 of the Act. The provisions of set off, or carry forward and set off contained in Chapter VI that is, section 70 to section 79 are…

M/S ELEM INVESTMENT(P)LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. THE DICT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 121/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…43(5). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 119/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss :- 7 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., against its income from other sources viz., interest and dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 114/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…. It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Highgrace Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 591/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss :- 7 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., against its income from other sources viz., interest and dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTEMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 590/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…. It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Highgrace Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 589/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…43(5). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S VECYES INVESTEMENT PVT LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 588/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…action is not speculation as defined u/s. 43(5). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S HIGH GRACE INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 619/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…. It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Highgrace Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 617/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…43(5). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 616/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss :- 7 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., against its income from other sources viz., interest and dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTEMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 733/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…. It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Highgrace Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 732/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss :- 7 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., against its income from other sources viz., interest and dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 731/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…43(5). It was submitted that assessee is entitled to set-off the business loss against its income from other sources viz., interest and :- 7 -: M/s. Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd., dividend income. Assessee relied on the decision of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [41 ITD 469] (Bom), Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd., [95 ITD 117] (Mum.)(SB) and Godavari Capital Ltd., [91 ITD 274] (Hyd). 5.1. Ld.CIT(A), however, did not agree and after analyzing the agreement entered into on 16-08-2001 with the promoters of DQ and the case law on the subject and also the fact that the said company has allotted shares subsequently to variou…

ITO, WD-6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATRAJ VINIMAY PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1401/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1401/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ito, Ward-6(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Natraj Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccn 4643 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.Hangshing, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 73

…and placing reliance of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Eastern Aviation & Industries Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 208 ITR 1023 (Cal) and Mumbai Tribunal decision in the case of Rajan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 41 ITD 469 ; Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd. reported in 95 ITD 117; Kolkata Tribunal decision in the case of ACIT vs. Blue Cheap Capital Market in I.T.A. No. 2211/Kol/2004 & Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Lokpriya Trade and Agency Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A. No. 1781/Kol/2010, held that the assessee’s case base…

ITO, WD-2(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SUVRIDHI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 830/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.830 & 831/Kol/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11) Vs. M/S Suvridhi Capital I.T.O., Ward – 2(4), Kolkata Markets Ltd. 516, Kamalalaya Centre, 156A, Lelin Sarani, Kolkata – 700 013. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4092 F ( Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri G. H. Sema, Acit(Dr) Respondent By :Shri Ashis Kumar Rustogi, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/08/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: These Two Captioned Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2010-11, Are Directed By Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which Is In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertain To Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years & Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Revenue`S Appeal In Ita No.830/Kol/2015, Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Taken As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri G. H. Sema, ACIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Ashis Kumar Rustogi, FCA
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 73

…and profession has to be computed in accordance with the provisions of sections applicable to it, firstly under Chapter IV of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, during the appellate proceedings, relied on the case of Mumbai ITAT in Rajan Enterprises Ltd [41 ITD 469], wherein it was held that: i) Explanation to Section 73 comes in Chapter VI which deals with set off and carry forward; M/s Suvridhi Capital Markets Ltd. ITA No.830 & 831/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11 ii) Chapter VI comes into play only after income under the 5 heads are computed; iii) One has to find out income under each head and…

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VINARMA UNIVERSAL TRADERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3680/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Vinamra Universal Dy. Commissioner Of Income Traders Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-7(3), Jai Centre, 1St Floor, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 34 P.D’ Mello Road, Opp: Red Gate, Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Aaccv5090J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Vinamra Universal Tax, Circle-7(3), Traders Pvt. Ltd., Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Jai Centre, 1St Floor, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 34 P.D’ Mello Road, M.K. Road, Opp: Red Gate, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Aaccv5090J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri S.D. Mistry, A.R. Revenue By : Shri G.M. Doss, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2015

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Mistry, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss, D.R

…tion loss of the assessee. 5 M/s. Vinamra Universal Traders Pvt. Ltd. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) , however, allowed the claim of the assessee while relying upon the various case laws and thereafter concluding as under: “As held in the case of Rajan Enterprise (P)ltd 41 ITD 469 (Mumbai)-para 9 In determining the income - one has to set off the loss against the profits of other sources under the same head under Sec.70 and thereafter against the income from other head u/s.71. It is only then one has to see whether the proviso to Sec.73 was applicable or not as the provisions come into play when the Gross Total Income is co…

VINAMRA UNIVERSAL TRADERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3256/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Vinamra Universal Dy. Commissioner Of Income Traders Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-7(3), Jai Centre, 1St Floor, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 34 P.D’ Mello Road, Opp: Red Gate, Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Aaccv5090J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Vinamra Universal Tax, Circle-7(3), Traders Pvt. Ltd., Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Jai Centre, 1St Floor, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 34 P.D’ Mello Road, M.K. Road, Opp: Red Gate, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 009 Pan: Aaccv5090J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri S.D. Mistry, A.R. Revenue By : Shri G.M. Doss, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2015

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Mistry, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss, D.R

…tion loss of the assessee. 5 M/s. Vinamra Universal Traders Pvt. Ltd. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) , however, allowed the claim of the assessee while relying upon the various case laws and thereafter concluding as under: “As held in the case of Rajan Enterprise (P)ltd 41 ITD 469 (Mumbai)-para 9 In determining the income - one has to set off the loss against the profits of other sources under the same head under Sec.70 and thereafter against the income from other head u/s.71. It is only then one has to see whether the proviso to Sec.73 was applicable or not as the provisions come into play when the Gross Total Income is co…