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 ₹ 23,270,719/–. The assessee has also short-term capital loss for the current year of ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9,803,918/–. The assessee

ISHARES MSCI EM IMI ESG SCREENED 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 ₹ 23,270,719/–. The assessee has also short-term capital loss for the current year of ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9,803,918/–. The assessee

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 ₹ 23,270,719/–. The assessee has also short-term capital loss for the current year of ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9,803,918/–. The assessee

SMT.MANJU MAHENDRA GOYAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Manju Mahendra Goyal Income Tax Officer-19(2)(3), A/802, Surya Apartments, Room No.2018, Matru बनाम/ 53, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mandir, Tardeo Road, Vs. Mumbai-400026 Mumbai-400007 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Aafpg2990N

302 ITR 286)(Mad.) observed/held as under:- “The relevant assessment year is 2001-02. The assessees, Shri Sardarmal Kothari and Shri Shanthilal Kothari, filed their respective returns of income admitting a total income of Rs. 3,02,593 apart from the agricultural income of Rs. 25,000 each. The assessees have claimed exemption of capital gain tax under section

ITO 16(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. SHASHANKA GHOSH, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-16(1)(4), Vs Shri Shashanka Ghosh, Room No.438, 4Th Floor, C-701, Jay Bharat Chs Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Off. Yari Road,Near Amarnath M. K. Road, Tower, Varsova Andher (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400061 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Acwpg5915E

302 ITR 286)(Mad.) observed/held as under:- “The relevant assessment year is 2001-02. The assessees, Shri Sardarmal Kothari and Shri Shanthilal Kothari, filed their respective returns of income admitting a total income of Rs. 3,02,593 apart from the agricultural income of Rs. 25,000 each. The assessees have claimed exemption of capital gain tax under section

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)

section 90(2) of the Act with respect to short-term capital gains, it cannot revert to the provisions of the Act only for the purpose of carry forward of long-term capital losses. 3. Erred in stating that the Assessee had not responded to the show cause notice dated 13 September 2021, without considering the request of the Assessee

PLUTO SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

capital gain without appreciating the fact that appellant company had treated such asset as an Investment in its books of accounts and had never claimed depreciation on such asset under section 32 of the Income Tax Act,1961 and 2. The learned CIT(A) further erred in confirming the action of the AO of in disallowing expenses amounting to Rs.46

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 claimed by the appellant. In this case there was prior , scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) dated 31.3.2013. perusal of the assessment order shows that none of these facts were verified or examined nor was any view formed regarding any of issues. The appellant has not shown that the Arbitration Award was brought to the specific attention

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

gain under Section 50B of the Act. The ld AO did not dispute this. 010. The learned Assessing Officer further noted that while computing the net worth of the undertaking transferred value of fixed assets as per Written-down value as per income-tax Act, was considered at ₹1,58,18,035/- and value of other assets as per book

DHANANJAY MADHUKAR NAIK,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledhananjay Madhukar Naik V. Ito 12(3)(3) 306, Meghdoot Chsl, Sahaji Raje Marg Room No. 1631, 16Th Floor Koldongri, Vile Parle (W) Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400057 Mumbai- 400021 Pan: Alrpn7498M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Anil Masand Department Represented By : Shri P.D. Chougule

capital gains. The instant case was on a much stronger footing because there was not merely an allotment of the flat but even almost the entire cost of construction was paid by the assessee within a period of two years." The facts of the above cases are similar to that of the assessee 7.11. It is held in various judgments

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

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

302\nBhimani Street, Matunga,\nMumbai.\nVs. ITO – 27(2)(1)\nVashi Railway Stn Bldg,\nVashi.\n\nPAN/GIR No. AADPS1482K\n(Applicant)\n(Respondent)\n\nAssessee by Shri Satyaprakash Singh\nRevenue by Shri Sunny Kachhwaha, Sr. DR\n\nDate of Hearing\n23.01.2025\nDate of Pronouncement\n18.02.2025\n\nआदेश / ORDER\n\nPER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:\n\nThe present appeal has been filed

BENNETT COLEMAN & COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASST. CIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result assessee appeal is allowed and revenue appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Bennett Coleman Vs. Acit – 1(1)(1) & Company Ltd., 5Th Floor, Aaykar The Times Of India Bhavan, Churchgate, Bldg, Dn Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb4373Q Appellant .. Respondent Dcit – 1(1)(1) Vs. M/S. Bennett Coleman 5Th Floor, Aaykar & Company Ltd., Bhavan, Churchgate, The Times Of India Mumbai – 400020. Bldg, Dn Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb4373Q Appellant/Respondent .. Respondent/Appellant Appellant/Respondent Shri Srinivasan By : Venkataraman.Ar Respondent/Appellant Shri. K.C. Selvamani. Dr By : Date Of Hearing 23.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

302/-(ii) Web site registration expenses of Rs. 21,37,854/-(iii) payments made to clubs u/s 40A(9) of the Act Rs.6,52,274/- (iv) repairs and maintenance expenses disallowance of Rs.11,13,11,113/- on the capitalization of the projects (v) software charges to be capitalized of Rs.17,65,08,146/- and assessed the total

JAYATI S. CHAKRABORTY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhjayati S Chakraborty Acit - 31(2) 1803/1804, B-Wing, Oberoi C-11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Woods, Mohan Gokhale Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Goregaon (E), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400063. Mumbai-400051. Pan: Aaopc5980B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Aarati Visanji With Sh. Salin R. Divatia-(Ar) Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr)

section 143(3) of the Act dated 10.03.2015 for Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT (Appeals)-42 erred in confirming the Order of the Assessing Officer treating the gains on sale of residential flat at 302, “C” Wing, Oberoi Springs, Mumbai as Short Term Capital

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

capital assets, on a dissolution of the firm or otherwise in the facts of this case. What is to be noted is that even in a situation where sub-section (4) of section 45 applies, profits or gains arising from the transfer are chargeable to tax as income of the firm. It was observed that during the subsistence

LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE SHRI SUNIL DUTT,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 11(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2972/Mum/2012 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05)

302 were adjacent to each other and enteredinto and used as one residential house and the investment had been made by the assessee on his own account. Whereas in the instant case the appellant has not been able to prove that both flats were interconnected and used as one residential house at the relevant AY- and there was only intention

AKSHAY JANAK SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NFAC, DELHI

302, Matru Chhaya, Gulmohar, Cross Road No. 6, Near Laheri House, JYPD Scheme, Ville Parle, Mumbai - 400056 [PAN: AALPS8056P] ……………… Appellant CIT (Appeal), Vs Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi ……………. Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Rajesh Shah For the Respondent/Department : Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand Date of conclusion of hearing : 04.11.2022 Date of pronouncement of order

ITO 26(1)(5), MUMBAI vs. GOPE G. SHAHANI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

capital gains under section 54 of the. Income-tax Act, 1961. The, court said that the assessee had resided in a major portion of the building which the assessee had sold and had completed the construction of a new residential house in March, 1977. Hence, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of section 54 even though the construction

BANG EQUITY BROKING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

302, B-2, Marathon Innova, Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Mumbai Opposite Peninsula Building, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Ganpat Kadam Marg, Lower Road, Mumbai-400020 Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 PAN:AAACB9961E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Anant N. Pai, CA Respondent by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (SR DR) Date of hearing : 29/01/2026 Date of pronouncement : 16/02/2026