ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD DIST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

section 111A of the act of ₹ 8,771,564/– and other short-term capital gain of ₹ 14,499,155/– totaling to ₹ 23,270

ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD ACC,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

section 111A of the act of ₹ 8,771,564/– and other short-term capital gain of ₹ 14,499,155/– totaling to ₹ 23,270

ISHARES MSCI INDIA UCITS ETF,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

section 111A of the act of ₹ 8,771,564/– and other short-term capital gain of ₹ 14,499,155/– totaling to ₹ 23,270

INDIUM IV (MAURITIUS) HOLDINGS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMM. OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleindium Iv (Mauritius) Holdings Limited V. Dcit (International Transaction)-2(2)(1) Office 201, 2Nd Floor, Sterling Tower Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point 14 Poudriere Street, Port Louis Mumbai – 400 021 Mauritius Pan: Aacci4907P (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital loss or gain. Therefore, the legislature has kept this difference in carry forward as well as intra head adjustment separate for LTCG/LTCL and STCG/STCL. On further perusal of Section 70 to Section 74, it can be seen that the Legislature itself has recognized LTCG/LTCL and STCG/ STCL to be two distinct sources owing to computational dissimilarities. Accordingly, the Assessee

ANAND SWARUP MEHTA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAX)-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes\nin the above terms

section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by\nassessing the income of the Appellant at Rs.3,34,94,660 as against returned\nincome of Rs.58,65,270.\nThe Appellant prays that the Learned AO be directed to determine the correct\nincome.\n2. Computation of Long-term Capital Gains

SHEELA RAMCHAND UTTAMCHANDANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-30(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

capital gain tax arising out of the sale of the earlier house should not be taxed. Whether assessee himself constructs the house or he gets it constructed by a contractor or 3rd party that does not make any difference. The basic requirement for purpose of relief under section 54(1) is that the assessee should invest the sale proceeds

PREETI CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 28(2)(4), NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy Svs. Ito, Ward – 28(2)(4) Preeti Chirania 309, 3Rd Floor, Tower No. Flat No.3, 1St Floor, 6, Vashi Rly Stn., Mangesh Santa Durga Commercial Complex, Chs, Sector – 17, Nerul Vashi Navi Mumbai – 400 (E), Navi Mumbai – 400 703. 706. Pan/Gir No. Akbpc0636M (Applicant) (Respondent)

gain for the assessee related to penny stock transaction. In our considered view, the entire addition made by the Ld.AO is quashed. Further, the Ld.AR placed that the CIT(A) had made the enhancement of Rs.62,03,535 under section 68 of the Act. The addition made by the AO is Rs.20,18,348/-. The Ld.AR only challenged the addition

ANJU CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

gain for the assessee related to penny stock transaction. In our considered view, the entire addition made by the Ld.AO is quashed. Further, the Ld.AR placed that the CIT(A) had made the enhancement of Rs.62,03,535 under section 68 of the Act. The addition made by the AO is Rs.20,18,348/-. The Ld.AR only challenged the addition

ATYANT CAPITAL INDIA FUND-I,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL) TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Capital Gain (LTCG) is also governed\nunder different sections being 111A in case of STCG and 112/112A in respect\nof LTCG. Accordingly, the scheme of the Act itself recognizes STCG/STCL and\nLTCG/LTCL to be separate and distinct sources of Income. This distinction is\nhighlighted upon perusal of section 70 governing intra-head set-off of current-\nyear losses. Section

AVANI J AJMERA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

JITEN K. AJMERA (LEGAL HEIR OF LATE KISHORE H. AJMERA),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

JASMIN K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

REENA A AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

MANISH K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

ALPESH K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

270 82,43,260 62,97,992 19,46,080 AJMERA 5G 1135/MU -13 M/2020 -13 S U RE M/2020 LTD 5 IFSL AABCI468 ITA 2012 17,64,580 50,73,106 33,08,526 10,22,335 5 1109/MU -13 H M/2020 6 MANISH AABPA789

M/S MASCOT CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(2)(3)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Mascot Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax Officer 2(2)(3), 3Rd Floor, Indian Mercantile Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Chambers, 14R, Kamani Marg, Mumbai-400020. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001. Pan No. Aaccm 6531 H Appellant Respondent

capital gains made by the Settlement Commission. In absence of any independent evidence to establish receipt Commission. In absence of any independent evidence to establish receipt Commission. In absence of any independent evidence to establish receipt of extra consideration of extra consideration and in absence of any finding to reject the fact and in absence of any finding to reject

ASHISH K AJMERA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2(2), MUMBAI

270 | 82,43,260 | 62,97,992 | 19,46,080 |\n\n5\nITA No.626/Mum/2021 and others\nShri Jiten K Ajmera and Others\n\n| Sr. No. | NAME | PAN | Appeal No | Asst. Yrs. | Total Income declared in Return | Total Income as per Order | Disallowanc -es | Tax Demand |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 4 | AJMERA PHARMA SURE LTD | AAACA38 01C | ITA 1137/MU M/2020