CIT v. Joginder Singh

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

…cases: i) CIT Vs. Govind Bhai Mamaiya (2014)367 ITR 498 (SC) ii) CIT Vs. Chet Ram (2018) 400 ITR 23(SC) 10. The ld. counsel for the assessee further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Joginder Singh 217 Taxmann 208 and Gujarat High Court in the case of Movaliya Bhikha Bhai Bala 70 Taxmann.com 45 wherein their Lordships have decided that interest u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act is a part of compensation. 11. The ld counsel of the assessee relied on various decision of the ITAT which followed the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in favour of the assess…

Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Gurgaon vs. PCIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.357/Del/2023, A.Y.2018-19) Sanjay Kumar Sharma Pr. Commissioner of Village Om Nagar Income Tax P.O.Budhera Vs. C.R.Building Gurgaon-122001(Haryana) Faridabad PAN : BALPS0709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 03/01/2024 Date of Pronouncement 24/01/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order…

Virender Rathee, Bahadurgarh vs. ITO Ward-5, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargvirender Rathee, Vs. Ito, 7, Vishwa, Jatwara Mohalla, Ward-5, District Jhajjar, Bahadurgarh, Rohtak Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Akrpr2303Q

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Shri C.M. Garg, Judicial Member Virender Rathee, Vs. ITO, 7, Vishwa, Jatwara Mohalla, Ward-5, district Jhajjar, Bahadurgarh, Rohtak Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AKRPR2303Q Assessee by : Shri Pawan Chhikara, CA Revenue by: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/05/2023 Date of pronouncement 07/07/2023 O R D E R PER C. M. GARG, J. M.: 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 19.01.2023 for AY 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of a…

Nitin Kumar, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(5), Saharanpur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Assessment Year: 2018-19 Nitin Kumar, ITO, Ward 3(3)(5), 178, PS-BEHAT, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh- Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh 247120 vs. PAN DIUPK 5524 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dhurav Goel, CA For Revenue : Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2023 ORDER Per Chandra Mohan Garg:- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.05.2022 of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. Applicatio…

Chander Kalan, Delhi vs. Neac, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Chander Kalan, Vs. NEAC, 53, Maitri Apartments, Delhi. Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085 PAN: AKRPK1868R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Ishita Farsaiya, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.10.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.09.2021 of the NFAC, Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- “1. Th…

Dinesh Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-53(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2016-17 Dinesh Sharma, Vs. Ito, 389, Masjit Moth, Ward-53(5), Ndse-2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aarps5040F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashok Sikka, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2022 Order

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dinesh Sharma, Vs. ITO, 389, Masjit Moth, Ward-53(5), NDSE-2, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AARPS5040F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ashok Sikka, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.10.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.10.2019 of the CIT(A)-23, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- “1…

Kamla Devi, Hisar vs. ITO, Ward-5, Hisar

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Kamla Devi, Vs. ITO, 46, Defence Colony, Ward-5, Hisar, Hisar. Haryana. PAN: AAVPD4158K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.04.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- “1…

Ram Kishan, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-60(5), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Ram Kishan, Vs. Ito, C/O. Jain Khandewal & Co., 510, Ward-60(5), New Delhi House, 27, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Ahapc1442P (Appellant) (Respondent)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) Ram Kishan, Vs. ITO, C/o. Jain Khandewal & Co., 510, Ward-60(5), New Delhi House, 27, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN: AHAPC1442P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, CA Revenue by: Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25/11/2020 Date of pronouncement 02/12/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A)-37, New Delhi dated 26.07.2017 for…