← All Phrases

“Section 43(5)(e)”

Section References (mined)Section 43Section 43(5)(e)10 judgments

SMT RASHMI RAMESH DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 17(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1129/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. LohiaFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Chandra
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

invoked provisions Section 43(5) of the Act. The AO has also held that the assessee has been carrying trade in commodity derivatives. Section 43(5)(e) considers an eligible transaction in 12 Assessment Year 2014-2015 respect of trading in commodity derivatives carried out in a recognized association shall ... that the assessee is into commodity derivatives, provisions o f the Section 43(5) invoked by the AO, provisions o f Section 43(5)(e) relied upon by the ld. AR, Explanation (2) of Section 43 as to what constitutes commodity derivatives , Para 5 of Chapter VII of Finance

ITO WARD 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. FAIRDEAL INFIN SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 5833/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri Ravikanth Pathak,ARFor Respondent: \nMs. Kavitha Kaushik (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 69C

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI

FLAIR EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7091/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, SR. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 43(5)

scrips and accordingly, in view of the facts and Page 9 of 16 ITA No.- 7091/Del/2019 Flair Exports Pvt. Ltd. the provisions of section 43(5)(e) of the Act, the transactions done by the assessee on NSEL were speculative transactions as no commodity transaction tax was being paid ... finding of the AO that the assessee is into commodity derivatives, provisions of the section 43(5) invoked by the AO, provisions of Section 43(5)(e) relied upon by the ld. AR, Explanation (2) of Section 43 as to what constitutes commodity derivatives, para 5 of chapter

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 363/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2025AY 2015-16
Section 263Section 43(5)Section 73

transaction was undertaken on MCX-SX which\nwas recognized by the SEBI for currency derivative segments and was\nrecognized for the purpose of section 43(5)(e) of the Act; that all\nconditions of section 43(5)(e) of the Act stood fulfilled in the facts of\nthe present case ... furnished to him,\nwent on to hold the assessment order erroneous for having allowed\nthe loss on “FCDT”, noting that the provisions of section 43(5)(e) of the\nAct did not come to rescue of the assessee, and that as per the\nExplanation to 73 of the Act, this

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 362/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
Section 263Section 43(5)Section 73

transaction was undertaken on MCX-SX which\nwas recognized by the SEBI for currency derivative segments and was\nrecognized for the purpose of section 43(5)(e) of the Act; that all\nconditions of section 43(5)(e) of the Act stood fulfilled in the facts of\nthe present case ... furnished to him,\nwent on to hold the assessment order erroneous for having allowed\nthe loss on “FCDT”, noting that the provisions of section 43(5)(e) of the\nAct did not come to rescue of the assessee, and that as per the\nExplanation to 73 of the Act, this

DIMPLE ALNESH SOMJI,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 973/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Nitin RanderFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

MONEY MAGNUM CONSTRUCTIONS,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 27, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2445/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Money Magnum Constructions Pr. Cit, Circle-27 Room No. 401, 4Th Floor, Plot No. 157 Samruddhi, 18Th Road, Near Ambedkar Garden, Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Station, Vs. Chembur (E), Mumbai-400 071 Commercial Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703. Pan/Gir No. Aacfn 9126 C (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Paresh Shaparia : Ms.Sanyogita Nagpal Respondent By : 09.09.2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pcit, Mumbai-27 (‘Ld. Pcit For Short), Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Relevant To Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal: I. “Order Passed Under Section 263 Is Bad In Law: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr. Cit 27 Erred In Treating The Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 24 March 2022 (Re-Assessment Order) As Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue & Thereby Setting Aside The Order. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr.Cit 27 Failed To Appreciate The Fact That The Original Assessment Order As Well As Re- Assessment Order Have Duly Considered The Transaction Of Nsel Commodity Loss Of Rs

For Appellant: Shri. Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: 09.09.2024
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

assessee was not a beneficiary of the said scam. The ld. DR iterated that the entire submission of the assessee was merely on Section 43(5)(e) of the Act and the assessee has failed to give any reply pertaining to the Client Code Modification which is the main crux

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. S.P. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 38/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 35 & 38/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V S.P. Buildcon Private Limited Circle-1(1), S Ff-06, Shyam Plaza, Pandri Bus Stand, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Raipur Pan: Aajcs0653H (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Amit M. Jain, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05-09-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 43C

transactions are not connected to the business but are from speculative activities. It is further submitted of Ld. AR that as per section 43(5)(e), the transactions undertaken by the assessee is an eligible transaction and shall not be deemed as speculative transactions and, therefore, the provisions ... nature of business transactions which shall not deemed to be speculative transactions as per provisions of section 43(5)(e). Our observations are duly supported with the various decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR, referred to supra. Respectfully following the S.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. settled position

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. S.P. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

ITA 35/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 35 & 38/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V S.P. Buildcon Private Limited Circle-1(1), S Ff-06, Shyam Plaza, Pandri Bus Stand, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Raipur Pan: Aajcs0653H (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Amit M. Jain, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05-09-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 43C

transactions are not connected to the business but are from speculative activities. It is further submitted of Ld. AR that as per section 43(5)(e), the transactions undertaken by the assessee is an eligible transaction and shall not be deemed as speculative transactions and, therefore, the provisions ... nature of business transactions which shall not deemed to be speculative transactions as per provisions of section 43(5)(e). Our observations are duly supported with the various decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR, referred to supra. Respectfully following the S.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. settled position

M/S RAMAVTAR KRISHANAVTAR,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 214/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 43Section 43(5)(e)

reply mentioning that the loss was of the nature of regular business and also stated that in view of the provisions of Section 43(5)(e), the same cannot be treated as speculative and therefore, the same is allowable against the business income of the assessee. The assesee also submitted ... carried out through the broker Anand Rathi Commodities and all the trades had been executed NCDEX. In this case, the AO has revisited Section 43(5)(e) of the Act in the assessment order and observed that for the transaction to be out of purview of the speculative transactions, following