Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 6 of about 2,049 results (0.231 seconds)

Feb 08 2013 (TRI)

ShamIn A. Agboatwala Vs. the Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

P.M. Jagtap, A.M. 1. This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of learned CIT(Appeals)-30, Mumbai dated 18-11-2011 and the solitary issue involved therein relating to assessee's claim for deduction on account of indexed cost of acquisition taking into consideration the holding period of the previous owner of the property has been raised by way of the following grounds : "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in directing to consider the indexation from F.Y. 1981- 82 in which the previous owner first held the property without appreciating the fact that the assessee became the owner of property in F.Y. 2001-02 i.e. after the death of her father. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that the Explanation (iii) to section 48 clearly states that the cost Inflation Index shall be adopted from the first year in which the asset was held by the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2013 (TRI)

Acit - 1 (3) Vs. Weizmann Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

B. Ramakotaiah, A.M. 1. This is a Revenue appeal against the order of the CIT (A)-21 Mumbai, dated 24.06.2008. Assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing and exports of textiles and other goods and also engaged in services like leasing, financing, money lending and borrowings, bill discounting, financial consultancy services and is a dealer in foreign exchange and is also engated in wind power generation. AO in the course of assessment made certain additions/disallowances which have been challenged before the CIT (A) who after considering the submissions and past records deleted the same. Revenue is aggrieved and raised the following four grounds: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.23,31,963 against disallowances of lease rental, paid on windmill, ignoring the fact that assessee company with mutual understanding first purchased and then sold back to the manufacturer and against ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2013 (TRI)

M/S. Aditya Builders Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Dheeraj Plaza

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

D. Karunakara Rao, AM: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee on 3.4.2012 is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax-15, Mumbai dated 27th March, 2012 for the assessment year 2007-2008. 2. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. The CIT (Adm) erred in invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the conditions precedent for attracting section 263, are not satisfied in the appellant's case and subsequently, in setting aside the original assessment order dated 13.7.2009. 2. The Ld CIT (Adm) further erred in this connection in directing the Assessing Officer to compute the income of the appellant from the Link Corner Project for assessment year 2007-2008 by applying the percentage completion method. 3. The Ld CIT (Adm) further erred in this connection in holding that:- a) in almost all cases, the appellant has received advances from buyers in excess of 70% of the agreement value; b) the payments received indicate ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2013 (TRI)

M/S. Prithvi Prakashan (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

D. Karunakara Rao, AM: 1. There are two appeals under consideration and the same are cross appeals. These two appeals are filed against the order of CIT (A)-36, Mumbai dated 11.11.2010 for the assessment year 2007-2008. The grounds raised in both the appeals are connected and the same are being disposed of by this common order. Ground wise and appeal wise adjudication is given in the succeeding paragraphs. Firstly, we shall take up assessee's appeal and the grounds raised by the assessee read as under: "Ld CIT (A) of has erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 15,80,832/- out of Rs. 52,69,440/- paid to M/s. Media World Enterprises for purchase of "Kaldarshika" calendars on the ground that payment made by the assessee is excessive and unreasonable. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the said disallowance made ought to be deleted. 2. Ld CIT (A) has erred in confirming disallowance of professional charges of Rs. 3,60,000/- paid to Mrs. Ashoo Darda on the ground that no d...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2013 (TRI)

Sandstone Capital Advisors Pvt Ltd. Vs. the Asst Commr of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Vijay Pal Rao, JM 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated 28.9.2012 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) in pursuant to the directions of the DRP u/s 144C(5) of the I T Act for the AY 2008-09. 2. The only ground raised by the assessee in this appeal is as under: "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in making an adjustment ofRs. 15,16,87,983/- to the international transaction of providing investment advisory services. "3 The assessee is a 100% subsidiary of Sandstone Capital LLC., a Delaware limited Liability Company having registered office at Boston, USA. The assessee company was incorporated in financial year 2004-05 and is engaged in carrying out business in providing financial services. As per the investment advisory agreement, the assessee was appointed as an investment advisor by Sandstone Capital LLC to provide investment advisory services in connection with investments in Indian securities. The ser...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2013 (TRI)

M/S. Ambit Securities Broking P. Ltd, Vs. the Additional Commissioner

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

D. Karunakara Rao, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 21.11.2011 is against the order of CIT (A)-16, Mumbai dated 23.8.2011 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. There are two issues in the grounds raised by the assessee and the first one relates to the disallowance u/s 14A amounting to Rs. 21,54,498/-, when the dividend income of Rs. 1,80,613/- relates to the shares held only as stock-in- trade and not at investment; and the second issue relates to the applicability of provisions of section 115JB vis--vis rebate u/s 88E of the Act. The issues raised in ground nos. 8 to 10 are not pressed as they are only academic in nature and therefore, they are dismissed as academic. 3. During the proceedings before us, regarding the first issue, Shri Sanjay R. Parikh, Ld Counsel for the assessee, brought our attention to page 13 of the paper book and mentioned that the assessee held whole of the dividend yielding shares as stock-in-trade only and also demonstrated the investment in shares in th...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2013 (TRI)

Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City Mumbai. Navi Mumbai - 400 710 Vs. Pan ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

R.S. Syal (AM): 1. This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act') on 30.3.2012 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 11.6.2009 computing the total income at Rs.Nil after allowing set off of brought forward business loss to the tune of Rs.244.93 crore and unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs.2615.92 crore. On perusal of the assessment records, it was observed by ld CIT that: (1) the assessee company claimed to have raised funds to the tune of Rs.6485 crores by way of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCBs) during the year under consideration. No investigation was carried out by the AO to establish the name and address, genuineness and creditworthiness of the actual subscribers to such FCCBs in terms of Section 68 of the Act. (2) Out of the proceeds of the said FCCB funds, ...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 2008 (TRI)

Ddit and Adit Vs. Balaji Shipping (Uk) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The appeals by the Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee for the years under consideration have been heard together and are being disposed off by the common order for the sake of convenience. The issue arising from the appeals of Revenue is whether assessee is eligible for the benefit of Article 9 of Indo-U.K. Treaty.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to these appeals are these.The assessee is a non-resident company incorporated in UK which was engaged in transportation of goods in international traffic by ships.M/s. NLS Agency (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai was the agent of the non-resident in India. In respect of assessment year 2001-02, it filed the income-tax return declaring the total income of Rs. 3,00,25,837/- against the total freight receipt of Rs. 40,03,44,489/- by applying net profit rate of 7.5% prescribed Under Section 44B of Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). However, the tax liability was declared nil by claiming exemption under Article 9 of Indo-Uk Treaty. ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 2008 (TRI)

Avaya Global Connect Ltd. Vs. Acit Range 7(3)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 20.11.2006 of learned CIT(A)-XXIII, Mumbai relating to A.Y. 2002-03.2. First dispute that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the revenue authorities were justified in holding that a capital gain arose on transfer of TFD by the assessee to ITEL, in computing such capital gain on transfer at Rs. 45.9S Crores and bringing the same to tax.3. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the above issue are as follows: The Assessee is a company. It is engaged in the business of providing solutions in the field of voice communications and manufacture of telephone instruments, EPBAX systems etc. It was earlier known as Tata Telecom Ltd. (TTL). The Assessee had two divisions viz. Business Communications Divisions (BCD) and the Tata Fone Division (TFD), The BCD provided communication solutions and the TFD was engaged in the manufacture of EPBAX and telephone instruments. During the previous year relevant to the ass...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 2008 (TRI)

R.B.K. Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2003-04 is directed against the order of the CIT(A). 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the loss claimed by the appellant of F&O transaction as a business loss into a speculation loss. The CIT(A) further erred in holding that amendment of Section 43(5) is not retrospective and hence the benefit of the amendment cannot be given to the appellant.3. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in the ground of appeal of the assessee is covered in its favour with the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT v. SSKI Investors Services (P) Ltd. and Bangalore Tribunal in the case of C. Bharath Kumar v. DCIT (2005) 4 SOT 593 (Bang.), wherein held that dealings in derivative is a separate kind of transaction which docs not involve any purchase and sale of shares and therefore loss thereof cannot be treated as speculation loss. The learned DR submitted that in this case the settlement of the transaction wa...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //