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

391, claimed as not\nchargeable to tax under Article 13 of the India Mauritius (IM Treaty)\n8. erred in holding that long-term capital gains not chargeable to tax under\nthe IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section

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

391, claimed as not\nchargeable to tax under Article 13 of the India Mauritius (IM Treaty)\n8. erred in holding that long-term capital gains not chargeable to tax under\nthe IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section

ISHARES CORE MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE EMERGING MARKETS MAURITIUS COMPANY),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

391, claimed as not\nchargeable to tax under Article 13 of the India Mauritius (IM Treaty)\n8. erred in holding that long-term capital gains not chargeable to tax under\nthe IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section

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

391, claimed as not\nchargeable to tax under Article 13 of the India Mauritius (IM Treaty)\n8. erred in holding that long-term capital gains not chargeable to tax under\nthe IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section

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

gain arises from the transfer of specified security or sweat equity shares referred to in section 17(2)(vi), the `cost of acquisition’ of such security or shares shall be the `fair market value’ which has been taken into account for the purpose of the said sub-clause. Section 55(2)(b) provides in relation to any other capital asset

ADITYA BIRLA TELECOM LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 approved by the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court and Hon‟ble Bombay High Court. Since there is no consideration for transfer of a capital asset, the capital gains computation mechanism fails and thus, no capital gains tax can be levied on such transfer and the same cannot be termed as „Sale‟. Reliance

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

391,602.\nLevy of interest under section 234C of the Act - Rs.146,705\n15. erred in levying interest under Section 234C of the Act amounting\nto Rs.146,705.\nLevy of interest under section 234D of the Act-Rs.10,020\n16. erred in levying interest under Section 234D of the Act amounting\nto Rs.10,020.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under

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

391,602.\nLevy of interest under section 234C of the Act - Rs.146,705\n15. erred in levying interest under Section 234C of the Act amounting\nto Rs.146,705.\nLevy of interest under section 234D of the Act-Rs.10,020\n16. erred in levying interest under Section 234D of the Act amounting\nto Rs.10,020.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under

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

391,602.\nLevy of interest under section 234C of the Act - Rs.146,705\n15. erred in levying interest under Section 234C of the Act amounting\nto Rs.146,705.\nLevy of interest under section 234D of the Act-Rs.10,020\n16. erred in levying interest under Section 234D of the Act amounting\nto Rs.10,020.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under

ITO 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DEEPIKA ANIL AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

section 147, of the\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 Capital gains - Income\narising from transfer of long-term securities\n(Bogus transactions) Assessment year 2006-\n07 Assesse purchased 3000 shares of\ncompany 'T' through a stock broker These\nshares were transferred to assesses demat\naccount - However, said stock broker submitted\nbefore authorities that he was providing\naccommodation entries for taking profit

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 gain getting chargeable]. 46. Thus, the amendment not only introduced a new formula but effectively created a new category of taxable events transfers of unlisted shares preceding listing. This category did not exist under the pre-amendment regime. The insertion thus enlarged the tax base, which is the hallmark of a substantive, not clarificatory, amendment. It would therefore

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) TDS 3, MUMBAI

391 read with Sections 100 to 104 of the 1956,Act.The contentions of the Regional Director are therefore clearly contrary to the prevailing lega1 position.” The above observations of the Hon’ble Court does not leave any doubt that buyback of shares cannot be equated with reduction of capital. 5.1.We find that while amending the CA,by introduction of section

KORN FERRY INTERNATIONAL P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

391 read with Sections 100 to 104 of the 1956,Act.The contentions of the Regional Director are therefore clearly contrary to the prevailing lega1 position.” The above observations of the Hon’ble Court does not leave any doubt that buyback of shares cannot be equated with reduction of capital. 5.1.We find that while amending the CA,by introduction of section

SHAILY PRINCE GOYAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-27(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No

capital gain exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act. The relevant documents like bank transaction, share transaction copy, paid through STT, ledger and demat account were duly submitted before the revenue authorities. The Ld.AR relied on the order of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court and the Tribunal which are as follows: - 4.1. Luminaire Technologies Limited. order dated 27/07/2012

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)

391 of the paper book. Subsequently 50000 shares were credited to the assesse demat account. The assesse in the F.Y 2011-12 has sold 9000 shares and remaining 41000 shares were available in demat account. Further the shares were split in the ratio of 1:10 and accordingly 41000 equity shares held by the assesse are split into 410000 equity

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)

capital gains on shares. Further the AO find that there is no correlation of price rise and the financial/ fundamental statements of the company. Finally the AO was not satisfied with the explanations and material information and observed that the transactions are not genuine and made addition of sale proceeds u/sec 69 of the Act of Rs.2

M/S. NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR. - 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Formerly Known As Piramal Circle 7(1), Aayakar Bhavan Healthcare Ltd.,) Mumbai - 400020 (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Income Tax (Formerly Known As Piramal Healthcare Circle 7(1), Aayakar Ltd.,) Bhavan (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal India Mumbai - 400020 Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Joshi Revenue By Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora Date Of Hearing 29/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 20/02 /2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Cross Appeals In Ita Nos.3927/Mum/2006 & 4066/Mum/2006 For A.Y.2002-03 Arises Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xix, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)Xix/It-104/05-06 Dated 31/03/2006 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 31/03/2005 By The Ld. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 7(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao). M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd.

gains of business or profession” was contrary to the accounting principles laid down by Accounting Standard-2 (for short “AS- 2”); (ii). that the ICAI had issued “Guidance Note on Tax Audit under Section 44AB of the I-T Act”, which specifically requires the formats in which information as regards the valuation of purchases, sales and inventories under both inclusive

DCIT - 3(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA FINANCE LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Araora & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2003-04 Deupty Commissioner Of Income Kotak Mahendra Capital Co. Ltd Tax ,-3(2), Room No.68,6Th Floor, Bakthwar,1St Floor, 229, Nariman Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai Point, Mumbai-21 Pan Aaack5577D

section 14 A, of Rs.7,54,500/- being 10% of the exempt income, disallowance of club entrance fee of Rs.22,75,000/-, addition on account of interest income from the government securities relating to the broken period amounting to Rs. 47,391/- , reclassified the brought forward capital gain