TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ality. Therefore, in the fact situation of the case, the tribunal rightly affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in setting aside the disallowance of short term capital loss. Therefore, the substantial question of law No.2 is answered in affirmative and against the revenue. - I.T.A. NO.379 OF 2017 - - - Dated:- 7-7-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) RESPONDENT (BY SMT. PRATHIBHA R, ADV., FOR SRI. S. PARTHASARATHI, ADV.,) JUDGMENT ALOK ARADHE J., This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concluded on 21.12.2011 under Section 143(3) of the Act wherein the loss was reduced to ₹ 65,51,060/- and additions to the extent of ₹ 18,98,65,500/- were made. 3. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who by an order dated 31.01.2014 inter alia directed the Assessing Officer to allow ₹ 84,31,093/- out of the total disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14 of the Act and balance was directed to be added to the total income of the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) followed the judgment of this court in the case of 'DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX VS. M/s BPL SANYO FINANCE LTD.', (2009) 312 ITR 63 and the order passed in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by placing reliance on the decision of the tribunal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 held as follows: Similar issue case came up for adjudication before the Hon'ble ITAT, Bangalore, in the appellant own case for the A.Y. 2007-08 and the Hon'ble ITAT decided the issue in favour of the appellant by observing thus: It can be seen that in the case M/s BPL Sanyo, the issue was forfeiture of share application money, whereas in the case before us, the issue is of forfeiture of share warrant money. In both cases, the assessee's defaulted in making full payment for issue of shares or share warrants. It is the condition precedent fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
