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%)\n4,60,58,240\nNIL\n(1,55,58,719)\n2,95,96

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\n4,60,58,240\n6. Accordingly

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%)\n4,60,58,240\nNIL\n(1,55,58,719)\n2,95,96

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\n4,60,58,240\n6.\nAccordingly

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\n4,60,58,240\n6. Accordingly

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%)\n4,60,58,240\nNIL\n(1,55,58,719)\n2,95,96

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) dated 12 September 2023 wherein the income of the assessee return at ₹ 22,03,96,120/– is assessed at ₹ 234,895,280/–. The only grievance in this appeal is that assessee short-term capital gain

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) dated 12 September 2023 wherein the income of the assessee return at ₹ 22,03,96,120/– is assessed at ₹ 234,895,280/–. The only grievance in this appeal is that assessee short-term capital gain

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) dated 12 September 2023 wherein the income of the assessee return at ₹ 22,03,96,120/– is assessed at ₹ 234,895,280/–. The only grievance in this appeal is that assessee short-term capital gain

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) dated 12 September 2023 wherein the income of the assessee return at ₹ 22,03,96,120/– is assessed at ₹ 234,895,280/–. The only grievance in this appeal is that assessee short-term capital gain

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) dated 12 September 2023 wherein the income of the assessee return at ₹ 22,03,96,120/– is assessed at ₹ 234,895,280/–. The only grievance in this appeal is that assessee short-term capital gain

FIDELITY SALEM STREET TRUST FIDELITY SAI EMERGING MARKETS INDEX FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

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

Gains 1,27,79,59,707 [Subject to STT and taxable as per section 115AD read with section 111A of the Act at the rate of 15%] Less. Brought Forward Short-Term Capital Loss (31,96

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)

Gains 1,27,79,59,707 [Subject to STT and taxable as per section 115AD read with section 111A of the Act at the rate of 15%] Less. Brought Forward Short-Term Capital Loss (31,96

FRANK S INTERNATIONAL ITL LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE (2)(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the\nassessee

96,80,930/-, towards which the assessee has declared long term capital gain\noffered in the return of income amounting to Rs.7,64,34,724/-. The ld. AO further\nobserved that the said asset was acquired in F.Y. 2012-13 which was shown in the\nbalance sheet in the return of income of the A.Y. 2013-14 as 'Work

SUKHPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Income Tax Officer Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia (International Tax) Ward 6/24, Milan Building, 1(1)(1), 87, Tardeo Road, Room No.1817A, 18 Th Vs. Opp. Tardeo A C Market, Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400 034 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azupa6884D Assessee By : Shri Rashmikant C. Modi & Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke, Ars Revenue By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Sash, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.04.2024 27.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement :

96,00,000 21/5/2018 159624000 30024000 16757858 314100000 386866500 72766500 28750358 Indexed cost of acquisition 358116142 As the assessee has, long term carried forward capital losses 06. of Rs. 5,47,18,953/- for Ay 2013-14 to 2018-19 which is more than long term capital gain of Rs 28750358, he claimed set off of the same and Long

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(4), MUMBAI vs. SHRI NARENDRA GEHLAUT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed e appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Dy. Cit, Central Circle-6(4), Shri Narendra Gehlaut, Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air 875, Sector – 17B, Gurgaon, India Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Haryana, 122 001. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aazpg 9630 K Appellant Respondent

section 153A of the Act. During the scrutiny proceedings, the During the scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed Assessing Officer noticed ‘long term capital gain long term capital gain’(LTCG) of Rs.8,98,59,373/- declared by the assessee on transfer and declared by the assessee on transfer and declared by the assessee on transfer and assignment of provisional reservation

PANKAJ ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. JT CIT RG 25(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pankaj Enterprises, Jt. Cit Range-25(3), C/O Shankarlal Jain & Assoicates Pritashkar Bhavan, Bkc, 12, Engineer Building, 265, Vs. Bandra (E), Princess Street, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aacfp 3044 K Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax- M/S Pankaj Enterprises, 25(3), Plot No. 1, Behind Ice Factory, Room No. 601, C-10, 6Th Floor, Vs. Saki Vihar Road, Chandivali, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Mumbai-400072. Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacfp 3044 K Appellant Respondent Co No. 313/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 4875/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Co No. 312/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 4876/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2012-13

96,000 Less : Indexed cost of land developer Less : Indexed cost of land developer 20,08,467 20,08,467 Less : Cost of Basement Demolition 8460 Less : Cost of Basement Demolition 8460 76,14,000/- 5,25,18,467 5,25,18,467 sq ft @ 900/- per sq ft Long Term Capital Gain liable for taxation Long Term Capital Gain

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 25(3), MUMBAI vs. PANKAJ ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pankaj Enterprises, Jt. Cit Range-25(3), C/O Shankarlal Jain & Assoicates Pritashkar Bhavan, Bkc, 12, Engineer Building, 265, Vs. Bandra (E), Princess Street, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aacfp 3044 K Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax- M/S Pankaj Enterprises, 25(3), Plot No. 1, Behind Ice Factory, Room No. 601, C-10, 6Th Floor, Vs. Saki Vihar Road, Chandivali, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Mumbai-400072. Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacfp 3044 K Appellant Respondent Co No. 313/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 4875/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Co No. 312/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 4876/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2012-13

96,000 Less : Indexed cost of land developer Less : Indexed cost of land developer 20,08,467 20,08,467 Less : Cost of Basement Demolition 8460 Less : Cost of Basement Demolition 8460 76,14,000/- 5,25,18,467 5,25,18,467 sq ft @ 900/- per sq ft Long Term Capital Gain liable for taxation Long Term Capital Gain