EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF TEXAS ,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 111A of the Act] computed in the following manner: Particulars Amount (In INR.) Short-Term Capital Gains 1,77,58

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

section 111A of the Act\n(1,55,58,719)\nNet Short-term capital gains\n2,95,96,810\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\nNet Short-term capital gains\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 15%)\n4,51,55,529\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 30%)\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\n(1,55,58,719)\nNet Short-term capital gains\n2,95,96,810\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\nNet Short-term capital gains\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 15%)\n4,51,55,529\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 30%)\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\nNet Short-term capital gains\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 15%)\n4,51,55,529\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 30%)\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\n(1,55,58,719)\nNet Short-term capital gains\n2,95,96,810\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\n(1,55,58,719)\nNet Short-term capital gains\n2,95,96,810\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\nNet Short-term capital gains\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 15%)\n4,51,55,529\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 30%)\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\nNet Short-term capital gains\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 15%)\n4,51,55,529\nAmount (INR)\n(Taxable @ 30%)\n4,60,58

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

section 111A of the Act\n(1,55,58,719)\nNet Short-term capital gains\n2,95,96,810\n4,60,58

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 144C (5) of the act issued by the dispute resolution panel – 1, Mumbai (the learned DRP) on 12/9/2023 wherein the income of the assessee of ₹ 58,178,706 is assessed at ₹ 61,915,486/– . Fact shows that assessee has earned the income under the head 025. capital gains

ISHARES EMSC MAURITIUS CO ,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 144C (5) of the act issued by the dispute resolution panel – 1, Mumbai (the learned DRP) on 12/9/2023 wherein the income of the assessee of ₹ 58,178,706 is assessed at ₹ 61,915,486/– . Fact shows that assessee has earned the income under the head 025. capital gains

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 144C (5) of the act issued by the dispute resolution panel – 1, Mumbai (the learned DRP) on 12/9/2023 wherein the income of the assessee of ₹ 58,178,706 is assessed at ₹ 61,915,486/– . Fact shows that assessee has earned the income under the head 025. capital gains

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 144C (5) of the act issued by the dispute resolution panel – 1, Mumbai (the learned DRP) on 12/9/2023 wherein the income of the assessee of ₹ 58,178,706 is assessed at ₹ 61,915,486/– . Fact shows that assessee has earned the income under the head 025. capital gains

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 144C (5) of the act issued by the dispute resolution panel – 1, Mumbai (the learned DRP) on 12/9/2023 wherein the income of the assessee of ₹ 58,178,706 is assessed at ₹ 61,915,486/– . Fact shows that assessee has earned the income under the head 025. capital gains

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal