M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI
In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed
ITA 450/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Ahiliabai Sardessai Assistant Commissioner Of 301, Lotus Court, M. G. Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Vs. Road, St. Inwz Junction, Panaji. Panaji, Goa-403001. (Pan: Aagfa9044G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1 Vide Ita No. Cit(A), Pnj-1/10391/2017-18 Dated 14.09.2018 For A.Y. 2015-16 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit, Circle-1(1), Panaji, Goa Dated 13.12.2017. 2. Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.
For Appellant: Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A
capital gains (Net) Rs.33,45,807/- offered for taxation.
4.1. Assessee submitted that investment related decisions were taken by the partners of the firm only which were based on suggestion/analysis of broking agency who were paid by the Asset
Management companies/Mutual Funds and no commission/service fees were borne by the assessee. Accordingly, there were no expenses which were charged
