FIDELITY SALEM STREET TRUST FIDELITY SAI EMERGING MARKETS INDEX FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

150/-. In the return of income the Assessee offered to tax the net Short Term Capital Gains (STCG) of INR.2,82,24,400/- [taxable at 15% under Section 111A of the Act] computed in the following manner: Particulars Amount (In INR.) Short-Term Capital Gains 1

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

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

150(1),\nas amended with effect from 1-4-1989,\ndoes not enable authorities to reopen\nassessments which have become final\ndue to bar of limitation prior to 1-4-1989\nand this position is applicable equally to\nreassessments proposed on basis of\norders passed under Act or under any\nother law - Held, yes\nInterpretation of statutes - Rule of strict

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

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

capital gains arising fromthe Development Agreement dated 09.10.2002, constituted a finding OR direction within the meaning of section 150(1

ICICI BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT -2(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Icici Bank Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Icici Bank Towers, Income-Tax 2(3)(1) Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 5Th Floor, Room No.552, Badra (East), Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci1195H

150). 1.7. As regards the second observation that the indexation is to be done on the a. The mode of computation of capital gains viz. difference between sale proceeds and cost of acquisition is laid down in section 48 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Further, Rule 115 of the Income-tax Rules ("the Rules") prescribes, in case

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 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

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

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

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

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. Whereas, as per the facts, of the case the exemption

VISHAL DUTT,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 22(3)(4), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 878/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Vishal Dutt, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward 205, B-Wing, Big Splash, – 22(3)(4), V. Sector – 17,Vashi, 3 Rd Floor, Tower No. 6, Navi Mumbai – 400703. Vashi Railway Station, Navi Mumbai – 400 703. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aagpd 1553 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

1) Nevali land and 2) Palidevad land for a consideration of Rs.42,51,000/- and Rs.45,00,000/- respectively and earned long term capital gains of Rs.40,13,551/- and Rs. 23,72,109/- respectively. The assessee has claimed benefit u/s. 54F of the Act in respect of the whole long term capital gains and has filed the details

ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. SACHIN R. TENDULKAR, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit 19(3), Shri Sachin R. Tendulkar, R.No.305, 3Rd Floor, 19-A Perry Rd, बनाम/ Pirmal Chanbers, Bandra (E) Vs. Parel Mumbai-400050 Mumbai-400012 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaapt4135B Revenue By Shri Ta Khan (Dr) Respondent By Shri Jitendra Jian (Ar) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 25 /01/2017

150/- which is 2.34% only, and income t Rs.8.76 cr. from 'Other Sources' constitutes 30% of the gross tot, income. (4) The total of dividend and capital gain declared by the appellant Rs.6. 16 cr., out of which dividend income from investment in shares mutual fund is Rs.4.71 cr., which is 76.49% of the total income and capital gain from

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

AMIRALI AKBARALI ENGINEER,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 24(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13 Amirali Akbarali Engineer, Vs Acit, A/201, Senha Apna Ghar, Ward-24(1), Unit No.11, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Swami Samarth Nagar, Mumbai Andheri (West), Mumbai-400053 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aacpe9331N

gain tax is provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 6 Amirali Akbarali Engineer 54EB, 54F and 54H as is apparent from section 45 itself. A perusal of the provisions of sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB and 54F clearly reveals that the Legislature has used the words ‘a’ and ‘any’ with reference to investment of capital gain/sale

JSW STEEL LTD vs. ASST CIT CIR 11(5),

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

1). However a vital fact to be noted in the present case is that, the assessee while computing the book profit under section 115JB in the revised computation of income has included the amount of Rs.314.14 crores (i.e. Rs.228.46 + Rs.86.01) which represented the exceptional items of receipts on account of waiver of loan and same was not taken to ‘capital

ASST CIT CIR 11(5) vs. JSW STEEL LTD,

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

1). However a vital fact to be noted in the present case is that, the assessee while computing the book profit under section 115JB in the revised computation of income has included the amount of Rs.314.14 crores (i.e. Rs.228.46 + Rs.86.01) which represented the exceptional items of receipts on account of waiver of loan and same was not taken to ‘capital

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

1,63,34,215/-against the short-term gain computed on depreciable assets under 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

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

ACIT-17(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA EMPLOYEES STOCK OPTION TRUST., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

150 TTJ 228 (Delhi) and many other cases of similar nature. We further derive support from the judgment of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of PNB Finance Ltd. vs. CIT 252 ITR 191(Delhi), wherein it was held that as per section 2(14), the term "property" is of wide amplitude. It signifies every possible interest which