← All Phrases

“Section 70(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 70Section 70(2)71 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 70(2) is MavaliyaBhikhubhaiBalabhai v. ITO (TDS)\n (70 Taxmann.com 45), cited in 93 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 70(2)

MavaliyaBhikhubhaiBalabhai v. ITO (TDS)\n
70 Taxmann.com 45 · 2016 · High Court
93
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, forms an integral part of enhanced compensation and is not taxable as "Income from Other Sources" under Section 56(2)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Finance Act, 2009 amendments do not alter the compensatory nature of such interest.

Bai Sonabai Hirji Agiary Trust v. ITO
93 ITD 70 · 2005 · ITAT
39
citing judgments

For the purpose of accumulation of income under section 11(1)(a), the calculation is to be made on the gross receipts of the trust before deducting any expenses. This interpretation is based on the plain language of section 11(1)(a) and is supported by Supreme Court decisions.

Goodyear (I) Ltd. v. ITO
73 ITD 189 · 2000 · ITAT
27
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for the transfer of the use of licenses, without acquiring ownership rights or an enduring benefit, constitutes revenue expenditure. Such payments are allowable as a deduction if they are directly relatable to services in the revenue field.

JCIT v. Montgomery Emerging Marketing Funds,\n
100 ITD 217 · 2006 · ITAT
23
citing judgments

Each transaction can be considered a separate source of income, allowing taxpayers to choose between the Income-tax Act and a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) for each transaction. Section 70(2) of the Act does not prescribe an order for setting off specific short-term capital losses against specific short-term capital gains, favouring the taxpayer in interpretation.

Kishorebhai Bhikhabhai Virani v. ACIT
367 ITR 261 · 2014 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares and equity-oriented mutual funds are exempt if the shares are long-term capital assets, transferred on the stock exchange, and the sale transaction is subject to levy. The case also relates to the application of beneficial provisions and the rejection of claims under Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA).

Raptakos Brett & Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
69 SOT 383 · 2015 · ITAT
20
citing judgments

Long-term capital loss on the sale of shares can be set off and carried forward under sections 70 and 71, as section 10(38) only exempts long-term capital gains and does not encompass capital losses.

ACIT v. J.P. Morgan India Investment Company Mauritius Limited
143 Taxmann.com 82 · 2022 · ITAT
18
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims treaty benefits under Article 13(4) of the India-Mauritius DTAA, exempting capital gains from Indian taxation, brought forward short-term and long-term capital losses cannot be set off against such exempt gains, nor can they be carried forward to subsequent years.

J.S. Capital LLC v. ACIT (Int. Taxation)
160 Taxmann.com 286 · 2024 · Reported
18
citing judgments

The set-off of short-term capital loss against capital gains is permissible under section 70(2) of the Income-tax Act, regardless of whether the gains are taxed at normal rates or special rates. This applies even when the assessee has capital gains chargeable to tax at different rates.

Judgments citing Section 70(2)

Ishares Msci Em Asia Ucits Etf, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 4566/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 270A

which it is the set off is taxed at a different rate. The ld. AR further submitted that as per the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act there is no restriction to set off the losses arising from STCG which are taxed at different rates ... also submitted that the that income computed under "similar computation" as contained in section 70(2) does not mean that the income should be taxed at the same rates only are allowed to be set off. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has the prerogative

Ishares Core Msci Em Imi Ucits Etf, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 4565/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 270A

which it is the set off is taxed at a different rate. The ld. AR further submitted that as per the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act there is no restriction to set off the losses arising from STCG which are taxed at different rates ... also submitted that the that income computed under "similar computation" as contained in section 70(2) does not mean that the income should be taxed at the same rates only are allowed to be set off. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has the prerogative

Ishares Emerging Markets Imi Equity Index Fund, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Taxation)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 4563/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 270A

which it is the set off is taxed at a different rate. The ld. AR further submitted that as per the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act there is no restriction to set off the losses arising from STCG which are taxed at different rates ... also submitted that the that income computed under "similar computation" as contained in section 70(2) does not mean that the income should be taxed at the same rates only are allowed to be set off. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has the prerogative

Ishares Dege Msci Em Minimum Volatility Ucits, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International of Income Tax (Int Tax)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 4562/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 270A

which it is the set off is taxed at a different rate. The ld. AR further submitted that as per the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act there is no restriction to set off the losses arising from STCG which are taxed at different rates ... also submitted that the that income computed under "similar computation" as contained in section 70(2) does not mean that the income should be taxed at the same rates only are allowed to be set off. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has the prerogative

India Acorn Fund Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4556/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri MADHUR Agarwal / FenilFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 234ASection 234C

Capital gains and differential rates of taxation as per section 111A or section 112A do not impact the operation of sub-section 70(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Per contra, the Ld. A.O. has held that payment/non-payment of STT and taxability at 15%/30% leads to difference classes ... issue is decided in favour of the assessee. 8. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the wordings used in section 70(2) which contains provisions with regard to set off of STCL states that the set off should be allowed for 'similar computations' which would mean that

Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia, Mumbai vs. ITO (International Taxation) Ward 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4139/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Income Tax Officer Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia (International Tax) Ward 6/24, Milan Building, 1(1)(1), 87, Tardeo Road, Room No.1817A, 18 Th Vs. Opp. Tardeo A C Market, Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400 034 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azupa6884D Assessee By : Shri Rashmikant C. Modi & Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke, Ars Revenue By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Sash, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.04.2024 27.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant C. Modi &For Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Sash, DR
Section 112Section 115CSection 143Section 144C(5)Section 254Section 45Section 48Section 74

issue is whether short term capital loss can be set off against short term capital gain mentioned above. Under the provisions of section 70(2), short term capital loss arising from any asset can be set off against short term capital gain arising from any other asset under a similar

Jane Street Asia Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3329/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna a/w HardikFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 115ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 234BSection 270ASection 70(2)

taxable under section 115AD of the Act (subject to tax rate of 30%). b. not appreciating the fact that section 70(2) of the Act grants an unconditional right to set-off short- term capital loss against short-term capital gains regardless of differential tax rate. 5. On the facts ... assessee appeared and discussed the case. The above submission of the assessee is given a careful thought but the same is not acceptable. Section 70(2) states that "Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under section 48 to 55 in respect of any short-term

East Bridge Capital Master Fund I Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2976/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआ.अ.सं.2976 2976/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2020-2021) 2976 2976 East Bridge Capital Master Fund I Ltd. C/O. Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29Th Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400 028 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan:Aaece8814F बनाम Vs.

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agarwal & Fenil Bhatt, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, CIT (DR)
Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 70(2)

STCLs suffered in category liable to tax at lower rate against STCG liable for tax at higher rate. The provisions of section 70(2) of the Act allows the Assessee to set-off losses against the income arrived under the same head of income. The section does not put embargo ... defended the impugned assessment order and direction of the DRP. The ld Departmental Representative (in short ‘ld. DR’) referring to the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act submitted that the expression used in sub section (2) is “similar computation” i.e., within the same category. Thus, STCLs taxable under

Js Capital Llc, Mumbai vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle 3 (1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3396/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Js Capital Llc, Acit (International C/O Vasa Chauhan & Taxation) Associates, Circle-3(1)(1), Off. No.41, 3Rd Floor, Room No.1605, Vs. 16Th Floor, Hi Life Premises, P.M. Road, Air India Building, Santacruz West, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaecj2857M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Hirali Desai, A.R. Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.R. Shri Nirmal Hardik, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07 . 02 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 02 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Amarjit Singh: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Acit, International Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Mumbai Dated 26.07.2023 For A.Y. 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The [Final Assessment] Order [Dated 26 July 2023] Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax - International Tax Circle 3(1)(1) Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, D.R
Section 111ASection 115ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 270ASection 70(2)

taxable under section 115AD of the Act (subject to tax rate of 30%). b. not appreciating the fact that section 70(2) and 74(1)(a) of the Act grants an unconditional right to set-off STCL against STCG regardless of differential tax rate. 5. On the facts ... STCG loss taxable at the rate of 15% against the STCG on sale of derivatives taxable at the rate of 30% under section 70(2) of the Act. 5. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the Ld. Counsel submitted that the setting off of STCL taxable

ACIT Circle-2 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Yogiraj Jaichand Maker, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6268/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 70(2)Section 70(3)

70(3) of the Act which deals with Long Term Capital Loss and not Short Term Capital Loss. It was further submitted that section 70(2) of the Act is applicable in the case of assessee. Further, reliance was placed on various judicial precedents wherein Short Term Capital Loss ... Loss (on which STT was paid) can be set off against the Short Term Capital Gain (on which STT is not paid). 12. Section 70 (2) of the Act deals with set off of Short Term Capital Loss and the same reads as under: “(2) Where the result

El El Hotels & Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 918/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

Empire Jute Co. Ltd.'s case (supra), the impugned expenditure was clearly liable to be allowed as deduction from the profits under section 70(2)(xv)." 27.5 We find, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd. (1972) 86 ITR 549 (SC) has held