{"id":50104,"date":"2025-01-16T20:56:38","date_gmt":"2025-01-16T15:26:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/mercantile-ventures-ltd-v-acit-2024110-itr-41-snchennaitrib\/"},"modified":"2025-01-16T20:56:38","modified_gmt":"2025-01-16T15:26:38","slug":"mercantile-ventures-ltd-v-acit-2024110-itr-41-snchennaitrib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/mercantile-ventures-ltd-v-acit-2024110-itr-41-snchennaitrib\/","title":{"rendered":"Mercantile Ventures Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)110 ITR 41 (SN)(Chennai)(Trib)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Held that the Assessing Officer had not applied his mind to the relevant facts in right perspective of law or carried out required enquiries in respect of short-term capital loss declared by the assessee. To this extent, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous. Tribunal also held that since, the transactions between the assessee and the eight companies were not at arm\u2019s length price the resultant loss declared by the assessee from transfer of equity shares could at best be treated as structured transactions to derive undue benefit of short-term capital loss. The Assessing Officer having failed to carry out the required enquiries he ought to have carried out in the light of\u00a0Explanation 2\u00a0to section\u00a0263\u00a0of the Act, thus, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section\u00a0143(3)\u00a0of the Act was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Therefore, the findings of the Principal Commissioner were proper.(AY.2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Short-term capital loss-Unquoted equity shares-Valuation of  market value  is not in accordance with Rule11UA(1)(c)-Control and management of  companies are with related parties-Transactions  are not at  arm\u2019s length-Revision is justified. [S. 263, Explanation 2,  R.11UA(1), Companies Act, 2013, S. 53] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-50104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-d28","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50104"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50104\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":50105,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50104\/revisions\/50105"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}