The C.i.t.-3 v. M/S.dhyan Investment & Trading Co
High Court
04 Feb 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The C.i.t.-3 v. M/S.dhyan Investment & Trading Co
Date of order
04 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The C.i.t.-3 v. M/S.dhyan Investment & Trading Co, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal.
Issue: The question of law as framed is as under :- Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of rupees 83,20,998/- ? : 2 : 2.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4153 OF 2005
IN
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1639 OF 2005
The C.I.T.-3 ..Appellant
Versus
M/s.Dhyan Investment & Trading Co.
Ltd., ..Respondents
----
Mr.A.S.Rao & P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Mr.Raj Darak for respondents.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 4.2.2008
PC
1. This is a motion for condonation of 259 days
delay in filing the appeal. An affidavit has been
filed by one P.P.Kishchandani to support the motion.
Considering the cause shown, delay condoned. Office
to register the appeal.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1639 OF 2005
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1639 OF 2005
1. The question of law as framed is as under :-
Whether on the facts and the circumstances
of the case and in law the ITAT was
justified in deleting the addition of
rupees 83,20,998/- ?
: 2 :
2. The issue pertains to the portfolio management
scheme profits. The dispute as raised by the
revenue was that the entire amount was not paid over
by the assessee to the parties. The stand of
assessee was that the portfolio management scheme
was a continuing activity. Learned Tribunal held
that the netting is the determinative factor of the
income of the assessee and after relying on SEBI
guidelines, accepted the contention on behalf of the
assessee. This is clearly a finding of fact. In
the light of that, appeal dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.