ISHARES INDIA 50 ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

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

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

ISHARES CORE MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

ISHARES MSCI INDIA ETF(AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA INDEX MARUITIUS COMPANY),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN ETF(AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN MAURITIUS CO),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

ISHARES MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES EMERGING MARKETS INDEX MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

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

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order.\n10. Without

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

gains u/s\n111A amounting to Rs.88,08,601 twice and taxed at 15% with surcharge and\ncess in the computation sheet.\n\n9. Without prejudice to above, erred in not setting off the net long term capital\ngains chargeable to tax against brought forward long term capital loss in the\ncomputation sheet as done so in the impugned order

CYFAST ENTERPRISES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 10(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year:2011-12 Cyfast Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Afl House, Circle-10(3), बनाम/ Lok Bharati Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Marol Maroshi Road, M.K. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400059 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacu4945K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Sunil Jhunjhunwala राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Anandi Verma-Cit-Dr

section 12B(2) is not attracted, full value means, sale price actually received. These two cases support the proposition that in the absence of substitution of full value of consideration of the capital asset with the fair market value of the asset, it is impermissible to deviate from the sale price actually received. 16.11. Now we espouse the other judgment

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

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

section 90 of the Act and by force of Article 13(4) of DTAA and\nsection 90(2) of the IT Act, capital gain arising to resident of Singapore is\nnot taxable in India and therefore, Article 24 was not applicable in the case\nof the appellant. To support the argument, the appellant relied upon the\ndecisions in the case

EMERGING MARKETS INDEX NON-LENDABLE FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

gains chargeable to tax against brought forward\nlong term capital loss in the computation sheet;\n12. Without prejudice to the above, erred in computing the income\ntaxable at special rate at Rs 5,692,636,750 as against Rs.\n2,563,142,330 determined in the impugned order respectively and\nconsequently, computing higher tax liability;\n13. erred in short grant

MATRIX PARTNERS INDIA INVESTMENT HOLDINGS, LLC,MAURITIUS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

274 read with Section 270A of the Act. The Appellant prays that the learned AO be directed to drop the penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act since the Appellant has made all disclosures in the income tax return, supported by legal arguments and judicial precedents at the time of assessment. 3. Levy of tax under section 115JB

EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY INDEX MASTER FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

gains chargeable to tax against brought forward\nlong term capital loss in the computation sheet;\n12. Without prejudice to the above, erred in computing the income\ntaxable at special rate at Rs 5,692,636,750 as against Rs.\n2,563,142,330 determined in the impugned order respectively and\nconsequently, computing higher tax liability;\n13. erred in short grant

I SHARES ESG AWARE MSCI EM ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) -2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

gains chargeable to tax against brought forward\nlong term capital loss in the computation sheet;\n12. Without prejudice to the above, erred in computing the income\ntaxable at special rate at Rs 5,692,636,750 as against Rs.\n2,563,142,330 determined in the impugned order respectively and\nconsequently, computing higher tax liability;\n13. erred in short grant

RAJAN GUNBA TELANG,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 21 , MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

capital gain account scheme within the due date of return of income as provided under section 139(1) of the Act. In this context, he drew our attention to the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Rajesh Kumar Jalan, [2006] 286 ITR 274

EASTSPRING INVESTMENTS INDIA EQUITY OPEN LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 2(2)(1) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S\Nshri Sandeep Singh Karhail\Nita No.1219/Mum/2025\N(Assessment Year :2022-2023)\Neastspring Investments India Equity\Nopen Ltd.,\N3Rd Floor, 355 Nex Rue Du Savoir,\Ncybercity Ebene, Mauritius\Npan - Aadcp4503H\Nappellant\Nv/S\Ndcit (It) – 2(2)(1),\Nroom No.606, 6Th Floor,\Nkautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43,\Ng-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex,\Nbandra (East), Mumbai\Nmaharashtra - 400051\Nrespondent\Nassessee By : Shri Ketan Ved\Nms. Riya Shah\Nrevenue By : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit(Dr)\Ndate Of Hearing – 05/05/2025\Ndate Of Order – 09/05/2025\Norder\Nper Sandeep Singh Karhail, J.M.\Nthe Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Final Assessment\Norder Dated 27.12.2024, Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(3)\Nof The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act\"), Pursuant To The Directions Dated\N30.11.2024 Issued By The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Mumbai,\N(“Learned Drp”) Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year\N2022-23.\N2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds:\N“Re.: Disallowance Of Set-Off Of Brought Forward Short-Term Capital Losses\Nincurred On Equity Transactions That Were Subjected To Securities\Ntransaction Tax (Stt) Against Short Term Capital Gains On Sale Of Right\Nforms Not Subject To Stt\N1.

Capital Gains' in the return of income.\n3. 4. The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of\nits case, the learned DCIT has failed to appreciate that altering the order\nof setting off losses would not impact the total income of the assessee.\n3. 5. The Appellant submits that the learned DCIT be directed to delete the\nerroneous

RAVI KANT HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 23(4), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Ravi Kant Huf, Income Tax Officer, Mohanlal Jain &Co., Ward-23(4), बनाम/ Chartered Accountant, Mumbai Vs. 10, Chartered House, Gr. Floor, Dr.C.H. Street, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400002 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabhr0354M

274 (c) As against the above Mr.Malhotra learned Counsel for the revenue in response submits as under (i) On plain interpretation of Section 54F(4) of the Act the petitioner has not utilized the entire net consideration taxable under the head Capital Gains

HITESH CHHATWAL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC -5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed while for the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

capital gains.” 5.36. A related case went up before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In the case of Arun Toshniwal, Mumbai v Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax 11 Appeals Shri Hitesh Chhatwal Vs. DCIT, CC-5(4) 18 1(3) reported in [2015] 59 taxmann.com 274 (Bombay) the question of law referred to by the assesse were as follows