TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu() : A.Y : 2008-09

depreciation on the cost of membership card. Is the cost of acquisition to be computed as per Section 50 of the Act or Section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. Further, what should be the period of holding of shares of BSE Ltd.; 13. At the outset, I make it clear that so far as the relevant factual matrix

ADDL CIT 1(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD ( FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Additional Commissioner Vs. M/S. Tata Communications Of Income Tax, Range – Limited (Formerly Known As 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited) Mumbai Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Room No.540/564, 5 Th M.G.Road, Fort Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 001 Maharshi Karve Road, New Marine Linmes Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S. Tata Communications Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known As Income Tax, Range – 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Mumbai Limited) Room No.540, Aayakar Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Bhavan, Maharshi Karve M.G.Road, Fort Road Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Tata Communications Ltd.

14. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision makes it clear that it is in two parts. First limb of the provision says, the Assessing Officer would include ACIT or DCJT or Asstt. Director or Dy. M/s. Tata Communications Ltd. Director or the Income Tax Officer who is vested with the relevant jurisdiction by virtue of direction or orders issued

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

14 of 38 10.2.3 In recent years, a number of decisions of the various High courts and ITATs have come which have held that where objects of the assessees demonstrated that they existed and operated purely for purpose of achieving an object of general public utility and these objects had nothing to do with any trade, commerce or business

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

14 of 38 deposits made therein and hence it cannot be said that interest received from the bank is in the nature of trade, commerce or business." 10.2.3 In recent years, a number of decisions of the various High courts and ITATs have come which have held that where objects of the assessees demonstrated that they existed and operated purely

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

14 of 37 (Gujarat) where the hon'ble High Court has considered the various case laws relied upon by the AO in the present case and also various decisions of the Supreme court and the High courts on issues of definition of trade and business, interpretation of section 2(15) and its provisio, CBDT Circular No. 11 of 2008 dated

ASST CIT CIR 1, KALYAN vs. ASB INTERNATIONAL P. LTD, AMBERNATH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7034/Mum/2013 & 7035/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Asb International बनाम/ Income Tax – Circle 1, Pvt. Ltd., V. Kalyan, E-9, Addl Ambernath Indl. 1St Floor,, Area, Mohan Plaza, Midc Anand Nagar, Wayale Nagar, Ambernath. Khadakpada, Kalyan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aaaca8424F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

2). The amount of depreciation and business loss remaining unabsorbed at the end of the tax holiday period should be determined so that the same may be set off against the income post-tax holiday period. 24.Chapter VI deals with the aggregation of income and set off or carry forward of loss. Section 72(1) deals with the carry forward

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the Four appeals filed by the revenue and four cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation exceeds the surplus as generated from holding coaching classes. In addition, the petitioner institute provides study material and other academic support such as facilities of a library without any material additional costs. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. H. Abdul Balkhi and Bros, (supra) held as under: The expression "business" though extensively used

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

14. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. We notice that the Special Bench in the above case has considered the issue of applicable tax rate for capital gain arising out of depreciable asset chargeable under section 50 and held that the legal fiction created under section 50 would not convert the short term capital asset into

THE GEM & JEWELLERY EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (E) RG 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for 10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Gem & Jewellery Export Acit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Vs. Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, 5Th Floor, Room No. 519, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Gem & Jewellery Export Dcit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, Vs. 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent

14-19, 2012, Vicenza Italy Vicenza Italy February 49 49th Bangkok Gems & Jewelry Fair 2012 Jewelry Fair 2012 February 9 February 9-13, 2012, Bangkok, Thailand Bangkok, Thailand Hong Hong Kong Kong Intl Intl Jewellery Show 2012 Jewellery Show 2012 February February 16-20, 16 2012, Hong Kong 2012, Hong Kong March Basel World 2012 Basel World 2012 March March

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT - 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

14 M/s. Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd., share exceeding such limit to any particular reinsurer, the insurer may seek the specific approval of the Authority giving reasons for such cession. (10) Every insurer shall offer an opportunity to other Indian insurers including the Indian Reinsurer to participate in its facultative and treaty surpluses before placement of such cessions outside

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Arun Khodpiatata Communications Limited Pr. Cit, Videsh Sanchar Bhavan, Mumbai-1 Vs. M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 2808 C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri J. D. Mistri Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: The Present Appeal, At The Instance Of The Assessee, Assails Order Dated 21.03.2025, Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), By Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, Both On Jurisdictional Issues As Well As On Merits, However, There Is Consensus Between The Parties That The Appeal Can Be Decided On Merits, In Which Event, There Is No Need To Go Into Various Other Issues Raised In Appeal.

14 Tata Communications Limited vs. Pr. CIT therefore, rightly restored the findings and addition made in the assessment order. Hence, we find no merits in this appeal and it is dismissed. 37. The ratio of the aforesaid decision is that once depreciable asset forming part of block of assets within the meaning Section 2

ACIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

depreciable asset , which proposition is further supported by a non-obstante clause in Section 50 which states that 'notwithstanding anything contained in clause (42A) of Section 2....' And Section 2(42A) of the Act defines short term capital asset and the period of holding relevant for determining the short term capital asset and Explanation 1 (ha) provides that in determining

NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

depreciable asset , which proposition is further supported by a non-obstante clause in Section 50 which states that 'notwithstanding anything contained in clause (42A) of Section 2....' And Section 2(42A) of the Act defines short term capital asset and the period of holding relevant for determining the short term capital asset and Explanation 1 (ha) provides that in determining