SCM Garments (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

69 SOT 397Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#21255 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing SCM Garments (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fiem Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5720/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT(DR) and Shri

Section 143(3)

…. vs AC1T reported in 159 ITD 1007. 2. Copy of order of Honble ITAT Mumbai in the case of DOT vs Mahendra Brothers Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 fl'D 772. ^ ^ 3. Copy of order of Hon’ble ITAT Chennai in the case of SMC Garments (P) Ltd. vs DOT reported in 69 SOT 397. 4. Copy of order of Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Adani Enterprise (P) Ltd. vs DOT reported in 68 SO P 129. 5. Copy of judgment of Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs D. Chetan & Co. reported in 243 Taxman 356. 6. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs Ambo Agro Products (P) Ltd. reported in…

ACIT Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Chennai vs. Tuk Tuk Exports, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1630/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1630/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Tuk Tuk Exports, Of Income Tax, No.R-36, R. Block, 16Th Street, Non Corporate Circle 7(1) Chennai Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040

Section 195Section 40

…lation loss for application of Section 43(5) of the Act. 11. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was appreciative of the above contention. According to him, Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of SCM Garments Private Limited vs. DCIT, (2015) 69 SOT 397 had held that forex derivative transactions which had a close proximity with the business of the assessee could not be considered as speculative business. He directed the ld. Assessing Officer to allow the loss as business loss. Now before us, ld. Departmental Representative strongly 12. assailing the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax…

Arjav Diamonds (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 7467/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Arjav Diamonds (India) Pvt. Vs. Acit – 5(1), Mumbai Ltd., 314, Prasad Chambers, Opera House, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No. Aagca2472D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43Section 43(5)

…he case of CIT Vs. Friends and Friends Shipping Pvt Ltd (217 Taxman 267) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel ltd (215 Taxman 140). The Chennai bench of Tribunal has also expressed identical view in the case of SCM Garments (P) Ltd Vs. DCIT (2015)(69 SOT 397) by following the decision rendered by the Hon‘ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Soorajmull Nagarmull (supra). Thus, we notice that the claim of the assessee is admissible in view of the availability of vast decisions on this issue. 8. In view of the foregoing, we are unable to agree with the view taken by the tax authorities on this issue. A…

Hiraco India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2300/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. N.2300/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2009-10) बनाम/ M/S Hiraco India Pvt.Ltd, Dy.Commissioner Of Income Gw 2050, Tax-5(1), Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, M K Road, Babdra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…he case of CIT Vs. Friends and Friends Shipping Pvt Ltd (217 Taxman 267) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel ltd (215 Taxman 140). The Chennai bench of Tribunal has also expressed identical view in the case of SCM Garments (P) Ltd Vs. DCIT (2015)(69 SOT 397) by following the decision rendered by the Hon‘ble Calcutta High Court in the 15 case of Soorajmull Nagarmull (supra). Thus, we notice that the claim of the assessee is admissible in view of the availability of vast decisions on this issue. 8. In view of the foregoing, we are unable to agree with the view taken by the tax authorities on this issue…