9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see. Re-computing and allowing long term capital loss after considering indexation - Held that:- CIT(A) has rightly observed that the AO determined long term capital loss at ₹ 75 lacs but did not allow indexation of cost. However, the assessee has stated that the loss after indexation works out to RS.1,19,10,163/-. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in directing the AO to re-compute and allow the loss after considering indexation. In view of the above, CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order which does not need any interference - Decided against revenue - I.T.A. No.2217/DEL/2015 - - - Dated:- 16-8-2016 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Department : NONE For The Assessee : Sh. R.K. GUPTA, CA ORDER P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce. Further, Ld. A.R. of the Assessee stated that Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue by respectfully following the Hon ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. BLB Ltd. passed in ITA 1878/2010. Therefore, he stated that present appeal may be dismissed accordingly. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. I find that Ld. CIT(A) has elaborately adjudicated the issue vide para no. 6 to 7 vide his order dated 19.1.2015. The relevant paras no. 6 to 7 are reproduced as under:- 6. Ground No. 2 is in respect of disallowance of ₹ 39,83,538/-0 which was fees paid by the appellant to SEBI. 6.1 The appellant is member of NSE BSE and is a registered stock broken dealing in shares and securi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd another In case of K Holding Co. (P) Ltd vs. DCIT 32 SOT 586 wherein it had been held that SEBI turnover fee, being a statutory liability was allowable u/s 43B of the Act. Accordingly, in the present case ITAT held that same as payment as fee is filing u/s 43B in the year under consideration as payment was made during the year. 11. The ITA T has come to the conclusion on the following basis:- (I) The SEBI is a. nodal agency for regulating the stock market, brokers, sub-brokers, and other brokers and intermediate who have registered themselves with the SEBL (II) The SEBI Act 1992, empowers SEBI to levy 'fee,' for registration for registering brokers/sub-brokers called as SEBI registration 'fee': - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the previous year in which liability to pay such sum was incurred 6.6. I find that in this case the facts are similar. The appellant was required to pay a fee to SEBI. The appellant filed an appeal before the Securities Appellate Tribunal who passed the order dismissing the appeal and thereafter the appellant made the payment. The amount of ₹ 39,83,538/- was therefore paid during the year. In view of the discussion above, in view of the judgement of the Honble High Court of Delhi the amount of ₹ 39,83,538/- is allowed as a deduction to the appellant. The addition is thus deleted. The ground of appeal is ruled in favour of the appellant. 7. Ground No.3 is in respect of the fact that the AO determined long term capit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
