ESSAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (2)(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

dividends accruing to them from their Indian investments. The basis on which the showcause notices were issued was that the recipient of the showcause notices were shell companies incorporated in Mauritius, with the sole or primary purposeof routing investments into India through Mauritius so as to avail the benefits under India-Mauritius DTAA. These actions created significant panic

EMERGING INDIA FOCUS FUNDS,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAXATION 1(2)(2), DELHI

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

dividend, the NAV (Net Asset Value) of the concerned scheme falls\nby a corresponding amount.\n\n16. The most vital aspect of investment in shares and investment in mutual\nfunds is that while in selling of shares the possibility of rigging the share prices\nleading to heavy capital gain and siphoning out the gains to tax heavens, cannot\nbe ruled

SACHIN KANODIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 42(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

dividends. On the basis of the financial health, it was highly improbable that a prudent man would invest in such a company. It is even more unlikely or rather impossible that the value of shares of such company would result in gain of Rs. 63,01,425/-. To reiterate, the investment of Rs. 10 in a single share would

SAKET KANOI,GURGAON vs. DCIT INTL. TAXATION, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

dividend. If as a matter of fact, the Legislature had contemplated making the unit as also a deemed share, then it would have stated so. In the absence of any such specific deeming in regards to units as shares, it would be erroneous to extend the provisions of Section 32(3) of units of UTI for the purpose of holding

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income. 9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic business activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on capital account and not as “stock-in-trade”. 9.4 That the assessing officer erred

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income. 9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic business activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on capital account and not as “stock-in-trade”. 9.4 That the assessing officer erred

NIKESH ARORA,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGON

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: We Proceed To Deal With The Substantive Issues Arising

deemed to accrue and arise in India. He submitted, all the Employment Agreements pursuant to which assessee’s right to acquire or right to obtain shares arose were entered outside India and were subject to the US 13 | P a g e AY: 2017-18 jurisdiction. Therefore, situs of assessee’s interest or rights to acquire shares, which

MODI RUBBER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground no.2 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

dividend income and consequently, the assessed income was enhanced by such disallowance. 5. The AO also enhanced the book profit computed by the assessee towards such expenditure stated to be relatable to exempt income under the MAT provisions codified under Section 115JB of the Act. The ‘book profit’ under Section 115JB was accordingly increased towards such disallowance

SAIF PARTNERS INDIA IV LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT INT. TAXATION-3(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

dividend shall be exempt in the hands of the Company under section 10(34) read with section 115-0 of the Act. Notwithstanding the above, the Company reserves its right to make additional submissions/claims (including carry forward of losses) in case your office do not concur with the positions taken by the Company. Yours faithfully, Shafiq-Ur-Rahmaan Soyfoo

DEEPAK KATHARI,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CC-5, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

deemed income earned by the assessee which can be taxed. It is not the case of the AO that the property was not sold in AY 2017-18. Be that be the case, there is no mechanism to go back to AY 2008-09 to determine the capital gain in AY 2017-18. We are in agreement with

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 05 , DELHI vs. DEEPAK KOTHARI , KANPUR

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

deemed income earned by the assessee which can be taxed. It is not the case of the AO that the property was not sold in AY 2017-18. Be that be the case, there is no mechanism to go back to AY 2008-09 to determine the capital gain in AY 2017-18. We are in agreement with

SANGEETA DEVI JHUNJHUNWALA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-70(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

dividend history and other financial parameters to substantiate that there was no capital loss against receipt of cash money. The AO made the addition on the basis of material available on record, the surrounding circumstances, the human conduct and preponderance of probabilities. 20.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the statement of the persons who controlled the business

M/S MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

capital gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income.\n9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that\ninvestment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic\nbusiness activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on\ncapital account and not as “stock-in-trade”.\n9.4 That the assessing officer

BIGSTAR HOTELS RESORTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 5(1), NEW DELHI

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

deemed to be the full value of consideration received for the purpose of computing income under head Capital Gains of the Appellant/seller.\n7. That for determining FMV in terms of Section 50CA r.w. Rule 11UAA, reference to Rule 11UA(1)(c)(b) has been made which further provides for book value of all assets except specified assets to be computed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. VIREET INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed as boave for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

dividend from 7 to 8 days of purchase of funds and therefore Section 94 should be invoked. In this regard, the appellant has contended that provisions of Section 94(7) can only be applicable on the short term capital loss However, the issue we are dealing is of long term capital gain, therefore, provisions of section 94(7) cannot

ADDI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed as boave for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

dividend from 7 to 8 days of purchase of funds and therefore Section 94 should be invoked. In this regard, the appellant has contended that provisions of Section 94(7) can only be applicable on the short term capital loss However, the issue we are dealing is of long term capital gain, therefore, provisions of section 94(7) cannot

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

gain control or as stock-in-trade. However, where shares are held as stock-in-trade, main purpose is to trade in those shares and earn profits therefrom and, in process, certain dividend is also earned which is tax exempt under section 10(34); expenditure attributable to exempt dividend income will have to be apportioned to be disallowed under section

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

gain control or as stock-in-trade. However, where shares are held as stock-in-trade, main purpose is to trade in those shares and earn profits therefrom and, in process, certain dividend is also earned which is tax exempt under section 10(34); expenditure attributable to exempt dividend income will have to be apportioned to be disallowed under section