Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (1.01 seconds)
Documents citing Gopaldas T. Aggarwal vs Income-Tax Officer on 13 June, 1983

Yasmin Properties (P.) Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 30 April, 1993

The assessee's reliance on Tribunal's decision in Gopaldas T. Aggarwal v. ITO [1983] 6 ITD 451 (Bom.) is also not valid because in that case, the transfer was that of life interest which devolved on the assessee consequent upon the death of his wife and which in turn had equal shares devolved on the assessee and his wife on death of assessee's mother. The point is that the subject matter in that case was life interest of the person who was selling or releasing, though that life interest devolved on the successive deaths of two erstwhile life tenants.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 18 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Mohan Nathumal Karnani, Mumbai vs Assessee on 25 October, 2012

4.1 The assessee has placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gajendra Kumar T. Agrwal v ITO (supra) in support of the case. However, the said case is found to be not applicable as the same related to legal validity of the proceedings u/s.263 in which if the A.O. has taken one of the possible views, action u/s. 263 cannot be held legal. The Tribunal in the said case referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699 (SC) in which it was held that whether the carried forward loss of the earlier year can be set off against the profit and gains of the subsequent year has to be 5 ITA No : 2107/Mum/2010 Shri Mohan Nathumal Karnani determined by the A.O. who deals with the assessment of the subsequent year and not by the finding of the A.O. in the earlier assessment year. This judgment also does not help the case of the assessee as there is no finding recorded by the A.O. in the A.Y. 2006-07 that the loss in the A.Y. 2005-06 was non speculative. In fact it has been held by the A.O. that the loss in the earlier year was speculative. The said decision of the Tribunal, therefore, cannot come to the help of the assessee in view of the several decisions of the Co-ordinate Benches which are against the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vastal N. Parikh vs Income-Tax Officer on 10 July, 1985

As regards the Bombay Bench order of the Tribunal, Gopaldas T. Aggarwal's case (supra), and the Bombay High Court's decision under Section 256(2), the essential fact has been that the property was received on inheritance which could not have been visualised. In other words, the submission is that the remainderman's interest is a capital asset, that it is possible to envisage the cost of acquisition of the remainderman's interest and that the question of any improvement in the case of remainderman's interest does not, possibly, arise.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 25 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Vishnu Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs Ito Ward 46(5), New Delhi on 18 May, 2022

In case of Gajendra T Aggarwal Vs ITO, the transactions relate to stock 4 ITA No.2836/Del/2019 exchange of India, which is MCX stock exchange, which was notified on 22-5-2009 and the transactions were governed by clause (d) of the proviso to Section 43(5), which was inserted by the Finance Act, 2005 w.e.f. 1-4-2006. Therefore, for the transactions, which were under consideration in that case, were held to be not of speculative nature under the provisions of clause (d) of the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Act and the said case relates to assessment year 2006-07, However, in the present case, as mentioned earlier, provisions of clause (e) of the proviso to Section 43(5) did not exist during the period when the assessee carried out the transactions.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nusli N. Wadia vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax. on 26 February, 1996

7. During the relevant assessment year, assessee sold the life interest for a consideration of Rs. 21,70,000 vide Agreement dated 19-3-1984, to M/s. Kapadia Trading Co. Ltd. and another. The assessee filed Profit and Loss and Balance Sheet. Loss on account of business was reflected at Rs. 1,267. It was found that loss was mainly due to motor-car expenses. In the computation sheet, assessee appended a note wherein the factum of the sale of life interest was mentioned. It was claimed that the amount is not exigible to tax as the cost of acquisition of the assessee was Nil. The assessee relied on the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294 (SC) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal decision in the case of Gopaldas T. Aggarwal v. ITO [1983] 6 ITD 451 (Bom.). The A. O. sought direction under section 144A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. As per the directions of the IAC, the amount was added.
Bombay High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nusli N. Wadia vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 26 February, 1996

7. During the relevant assessment year, assessee sold the life interest for a consideration of Rs. 21,70,000 vide Agreement dated 19-3-1984, to M/s. Kapadia Trading Co. Ltd. and another. The assessee filed Profit and Loss and Balance Sheet. Loss on account of business was reflected at Rs. 1,267. It was found that loss was mainly due to motor-car expenses. In the computation sheet, assessee appended a note wherein the factum of the sale of life interest was mentioned. It was claimed that the amount is not exigible to tax as the cost of acquisition of the assessee was 'Nil'. The assessee relied on the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294 (SC) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal decision in the case of Gopaldas T. Aggarwal v. ITO [1983] 6 ITD 451 (Bom.). The A. O. sought direction under section 144A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. As per the directions of the IAC, the amount was added.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Surana Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs Dcit, Cc-Xxiii, Kolkata, Kolkata on 30 August, 2017

3.4 Not being satisfied with the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has vehemently submitted, before us, that the issue under consideration is fully covered by the judgment in the case of Gajendra Kumar. T. Agarwal, Vs ITO, in ITA No.1798/Mum/2010, A.Y 2006-07 wherein it was held that as a result of the amendment in section 43(5) with effect from 1st April 2006, losses incurred in derivative trading are held to be eligible for being set off against normal business profits, as derivate trading itself is treated as a non-speculative business, and losses of any non-speculative businesses can be adjusted profits of any non-speculative business. The ld Tribunal further held that this amendment was to provide relief to the taxpayers and is to be viewed as beneficial provisions, as such, and one cannot possibly proceed on the basis that the object of making amendment in Section 43(5) was to kill the brought forward losses of dealing in derivatives or make them ineligible for being set off against the profits of the same business in subsequent years. Whatever may be characterization of income for the purpose of intra assessment year set off in the relevant assessment year, and irrespective of the fact that such a characterization has achieved finality in assessment, the losses and profits from dealing in derivatives mush be characterized on a uniform basis in the assessment year in which set off is claimed. Viewed in this perspective also, the classification of business for the limited purpose of set off of past losses, into speculative and non-speculative, is to be done on a uniform basis, and, whichever way one looks at it, the losses incurred in the same business in earlier assessment years are to be treated as eligible for set off against profits of the same business, subject to fulfilment of other conditions, in the subsequent assessment years. For this reason also, the assessee deserves to be granted set off Page | 4 IT( S S) No . 24 / Ko l/ 2 0 15 A. Y : 2 00 8- 09 Surana Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 8 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1