TATA SONS LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

150\nNew Capital\n6 (in Rupees)\n31,73,57,6\n1,580\n1,00,000\n40,40,450\n8,99,31.495\nMethod of\n7 Reduction of\nCapital\nCancellation\nCancellation\nCancellation\nReduction of\nFace value from\nRs.10 to\nRs. 5 Later\nconsolidation of\ntwo shares into\none. Therefore\nit is\nReorganization\nand\nconsolidation\nDate of\n8 Consideration\nNil

PRASHANT KOTHARI,SINGAPORE vs. CIT A (57) MUMBAI, OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS MUMBAI

In the result, the additional ground of\nappeal is allowed

gain on\nunlisted shares (STT not paid) of Rs.73,23,150/- at normal tax rate and the\nassessed income was determined at Rs 1,34,36,600/- accordingly.\n\n11. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the\nlearned CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the appellant submitted\nthat the India-Singapore DTAA was amended w.e.f. 01.04.2017 with

FIDELITY RUTLAND SQUARE TRUST II STRATEGIC ADVISERS FID EMG MARKETS FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )2(3)(1), MUMBAI

150/-. In the return of\nincome the Assessee offered to tax the net Short Term Capital\nGains (STCG) of INR.2,82,24,400/- [taxable at 15% under\nSection 111A of the Act] computed in the following manner:\n\nParticulars\nAmount (In INR.)\nShort-Term Capital Gains\n[which is not subject to Securities Transaction Tax (STT) and\ntaxable

FIDELITY RUTLAND SQUARE TRUST II STRATEGIC ADVISERS EMERGING MARKETS FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

150/-. In the return of\nincome the Assessee offered to tax the net Short Term Capital\nGains (STCG) of INR.2,82,24,400/- [taxable at 15% under\nSection 111A of the Act] computed in the following manner:\nParticulars\nAmount (In INR.)\nShort-Term Capital Gains\n1,77,58,894\n[which is not subject to Securities Transaction

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(4), MUMBAI vs. SHRI NARENDRA GEHLAUT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed e appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Dy. Cit, Central Circle-6(4), Shri Narendra Gehlaut, Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air 875, Sector – 17B, Gurgaon, India Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Haryana, 122 001. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aazpg 9630 K Appellant Respondent

capit that the interest paid to bank for acquiring capital asset would al asset would be eligible as part of cost of acquisition. be eligible as part of cost of acquisition.” Shri Narendra Gehlaut 26 ITA No. 1101/Mum/2022 6.2 On the contrary, the Ld. DR submitted that interest is On the contrary, the Ld. DR submitted that interest

SCHWAB FUNDAMENTAL EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETY ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Capital Gain 5,24,02,19,366 Taxable @ 10% Income from Other sources 1,24,38,93,370 Taxable @ 20% (Dividend income) Income from Other sources 1,90,920 Taxable @ 30% (interest from company) Total Taxable income 6,56,03,95,980 15. Assessed under section 143(3) rw.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Give due credit

ISC SPECIALITY CHEMICALS LLP ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

150/- exceeds Rs. 5 crores, the condition of section 47(xiiib) stands violated. Thus, the Section 47A(4) comes into play and thereby the value of assets so vested would be regarded as transfer, within the meaning of Section 45 of the Act and subjected to tax as capital gain

JAIPRAKASH L. SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands\nallowed

section 150 will not\napply.\nVI. FINDING OR DIRECTION. (S.149.).SEC 148 R.W.S 150:\nREOPENING OF ASSESSMENT BASED ON TRIBUNAL “FINDING\nOR DIRECTION ” IN RESPECT OF ANY OTHER YEAR OR PERIOD\nBEYOND SIX YEARS – NOT VALID\nThe Hon'ble Jurisdictional Mumbai Tribunal which is on similar facts\nANILSURI V/S ITO [2014] 46 TAXMANN.COM 8 (MUMBAI - TRIB.)\nHASALLOWED THE APPEAL

LATE PRAVINCHANDRA DWARKADAS DALAL (LEGAL HEIR HITEN PRAVINCHANDRA DALAL),MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IT CIRCLE 42(3)(1) ERSTWHILE CIRCLE 33(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

section 50 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, setoff of brought forward long- term capital loss ought to be allowed against the short-term capital gains computed on depreciable assets." 4. The Applicant most humbly submits that the Hon'ble Tribunal has power to admit the additional grounds

A.C..I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

capital gains at Rs.\n47,29,87,427/-.Where he is not even authorised to reopen the case\nas reassessment proceedings were initiated after the expiry of 15\nyearsfrom the end of the assessment year. reassessment\nproceedings are void and bad in law.\n11. The Section 150

RAMESH JAISINGHANI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

capital gains exceeding 1 lakh at the rate of 10% without allowing the benefit of any indexation. However, all gains up to 31st January, 2018 will be grandfathered. For example, if an equity share is purchased six months before 31st January, 2018 at 100/- and the highest 23 Ramesh Jaisinghani price quoted on 31st January, 2018 in respect of this

A.C.I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the\nRevenue is dismissed

capital gains taxability arose in AY 2003-04.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings for AY 2003-04 were initiated after the expiry of the limitation period prescribed under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal further noted that Section 150

MEENA HASMUKH SAVLA,MATUNGA MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is\nallowed

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs 22,20,150/-on account of Long Term Capital Gain

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38), in a pre-planned manner to evade taxes. The AO extensively relied upon the search and survey operations conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed

BHAVANA LALIT JAIN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-15(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

section 10(38) of the Act. The relevant details thereof are tabulated below:- Name of scrip Sale value Long term capital gain Radford Global Ltd. 39,19,667 38,19,670 (Earlier known as PS Global Ltd) Surbhi Chemicals & 92,19,378 87,19,378 Investment Ltd. Pyramid Trading & 20,14,740 19,89,740 Finance Ltd. (Now known

ITO-28.3.1, NAVI MUMBAI vs. SEEMA NARENDRA BAPNA, NERUL

In the result both the grounds of appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2014-15 Ito,28.3.1, Seema Narendra Bapna, Mumbai Flat No.A 2701, Plot No. R3 B Emerald Bay, Sector Vs. 14 Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Thane 400706

section 10 (38) of the act of Rs. 22,652,350/– on sale of shares of Surabhi Chemicals &Investments Limited. Assessee has also shown short-term capital gain on sale of the shares of same company for Rs. 34,053 in respect of trade made on 1/1/2014. The learned assessing officer in paragraph number 4 of the order recorded

NITESH RAJHANS SINGH,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

capital gain cannot be denied to the assesse. (A copy of order is placed on page no. 108 to 121) Further reliance is placed on the judgment of Manishkumar Baid Vs ACIT ITAT Kolkatta it was held that rejecting the assesse claim of exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act is not correct. The tribunal has relied upon the judgment

SHAILY PRINCE GOYAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-27(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No

section 18 of the Act and to file amended copy of Memorandum of Association along with Form No. 21 with the Registrar of Companies. The said undertaking is accepted. 9. From the material on record, the Scheme appears to be fair and reasonable and is not violative of any provisions of law and is not contrary to public policy. None