SHANNO MOHAMMED YUSUF WARSI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

1A, 101, Sangeeta Apts, Panch 4th floor, Building C-10, Room Marg, Off Yari Road, Versova Vs. No. 404, Pratyaksha Kar Andheri West, Mumbai-400058. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. AAJPW 0272 F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Pankaj Soni Revenue by : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14/02/2024 : Date of pronouncement 26/02/2024 ORDER

RAMESH BUILDERS (INDIA),MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

section 45(4) of the Act are clearly applicable in this case which stipulates as under: E.—Capital gains ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 9 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 Capital gains. 45.(1) **** (1A

RAMESH BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

section 45(4) of the Act are clearly applicable in this case which stipulates as under: E.—Capital gains ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 9 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 Capital gains. 45.(1) **** (1A

NELCO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. RG. 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 15(2)(1) Nelco Limited Room No.357, 2Nd Floor, El-6, Electronic Zone, Mahape, Navi Mumbai-400710 Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1983C

capital gain under Section 50B of the Act, where the net worth is decreased by ₹15 crores on account of bank liability and further other three expenditure and items. He referred to paper book containing 177 pages wherein at page no.3 to 91 is Business Transfer Agreement between the assessee and Crompton Greaves Limited dated 29 July 2010, was referred

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

1A Ward – 15 (1) (1) Vs. Koper Khairane Aayakar Bhavan Maharashtra 400708 Maharishi Karve Road New Marine Lines Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN ACIPJ0205E Assessee by Shri Prakash G. Jhunjhunwala Revenue by Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. (DR), 25th August, 2024 Date of hearing 15th October 2024 Date of pronouncement O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI

HEMANT SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-20(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (A.M.) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Hemant Shah Acit-20(1), Mumbai 10, Oomed Sadan 58, Sion, Mumbai 400 022 Vs Pan : Aadps2405E Appellant Respondednt

section 54F. Consequently, such capital gain does not accrue or arise and, therefore, does not form part of gross total income. If capital gain is not charged u/s 45, there is no capital gain chargeable to tax. Therefore, the investment made by minor children u/s 54F left no chargeable capital gain which could be clubbed u/s 64(1A

CAPT. AVINASH CHANDER BATRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7407/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Capt. Avinash Chander Dy. Cit., Range, 2(3), बनाम/ Batra, Room No. 556, 5 Th Floor, V. C/O Kucheria & Associates Aayakar Bhavan, 59, Jolly Maker No. 2 Mumbai-400 021 Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpb3384M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

gains, it is required to deduct from full value of consideration, the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection ITA 7407/Mum/11 & ITA 7439/M/11 8 with such transfer and also the cost of acquisition of the capital asset and cost of any improvement thereto. With the above background, we have to see whether the portfolio management charges

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. CAPT. AVINASH J BATRA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7407/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Capt. Avinash Chander Dy. Cit., Range, 2(3), बनाम/ Batra, Room No. 556, 5 Th Floor, V. C/O Kucheria & Associates Aayakar Bhavan, 59, Jolly Maker No. 2 Mumbai-400 021 Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpb3384M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

gains, it is required to deduct from full value of consideration, the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection ITA 7407/Mum/11 & ITA 7439/M/11 8 with such transfer and also the cost of acquisition of the capital asset and cost of any improvement thereto. With the above background, we have to see whether the portfolio management charges

KESHAV GORE SMARAK TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGLORE, BANGLORE

In the result, appeal is allowed

gains arising from such transfer, to the extent specified in Section 11(1A) of the Act, is deemed to have been applied for charitable purpose. A perusal of Section 11(1A) of the Act would show that on compliance/fulfillment of the provisions contained in Section 11(1A) of the Act it is the amount of capital

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

1A) as well as the Explanation to section 115Jof the Act”. (emphasis added) 9. On the second proposition that the receipt which is not chargeable to tax under section 4 cannot be brought to tax under section 115JB, Mr. Kaushal submitted that the first and foremost condition for taxing an income is that such a receipt should be first held

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

1A) as well as the Explanation to section 115Jof the Act”. (emphasis added) 9. On the second proposition that the receipt which is not chargeable to tax under section 4 cannot be brought to tax under section 115JB, Mr. Kaushal submitted that the first and foremost condition for taxing an income is that such a receipt should be first held

ANIK INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 40, MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7189/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5234/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 17/01/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 19/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

sections [***] [54, [54B, [***], [54D, [54E, [54EA, 54EB,] 54F [, 54G and 54H]]]]], be chargeable to income tax under the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. [(1A

SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita No. 524 & 525/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Sunbeam Monochem (P) Ltd., Acit, Circle-8(2)(2), 201/B Runwal & Omkar E- Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Square, Opp. Sion Chunabhatti Mumbai-400020. Singnal, Eastern Express Highway, Sion (E) Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aabcs 8172 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mayur Makadia, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr : Date Of Hearing 24/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 27/04/2023 Order

Gains of Business’. Correspondingly, it would have been adjusted from block of assets in terms of Section 45(1A) adjusted from block of assets in terms of Section 45(1A) adjusted from block of assets in terms of Section 45(1A) read with Section 50 of the Act read with Section 50 of the Act and offered as ‘Capital

DR. NARENDRA D. DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CRN CIR 34, MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

gains assessee has claimed deduction for the portfolio management charges paid to various entities which was disallowed by the lower authorities on the plea that expenditure was not incurred as a result of transfer of capital asset nor the same has expended the cost of acquisition of the asset nor it amounts to cost of any improvement. The scope

DR. NARENDRA D. DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CRN CIR 34, MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

gains assessee has claimed deduction for the portfolio management charges paid to various entities which was disallowed by the lower authorities on the plea that expenditure was not incurred as a result of transfer of capital asset nor the same has expended the cost of acquisition of the asset nor it amounts to cost of any improvement. The scope

DR. NARENDRA D. DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CRN CIR 34, MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

gains assessee has claimed deduction for the portfolio management charges paid to various entities which was disallowed by the lower authorities on the plea that expenditure was not incurred as a result of transfer of capital asset nor the same has expended the cost of acquisition of the asset nor it amounts to cost of any improvement. The scope

TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu() : A.Y : 2008-09

gains of business or profession, how computed.— The income referred to in section 28 shall be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30 to 43C." These sections include, inter alia, deduction of depreciation under section 32 and deduction regarding expenditure on scientific research in the manner set out in section 34. Therefore, the deductions which the Supreme

ANJALI PANDIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 12, MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3028 To 3032/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2002-03 To 2006-07) Smt.Anjli Pandit, बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Gajanan Building No.8, 178, Tax, Central Circle 12, Vs. Cgo Building, M K Marg, Jawahar Nagar, Mumbai-400020. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 153A. In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2004-2005 (i.e. ITA No.43/M/2010) stands allowed.” 8. From the propositions in the above mentioned decisions, we find that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the decisions cited supra. We therefore respectfully following the same hold that the AO has no jurisdiction