THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN vs. ESTATE OF LATE SH. JAGIR SINGH BHULLAR, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.306/Asr/2014 & 591/Asr/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Estate Of Sh. Jagir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through S. Jasbir—Singh Ward-1(3), Bhullar, Tarn Taran, E-250 Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. Punjab.

capital gains stands to be deleted because the estate had no property after the death of Shri Jagir Singh. 11. That without prejudice to the above, similar assessment/reassessment proceedings have been initiated against the Punjabi Cooperative House

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

house property at Rs.75,600/-, short term capital loss at (Rs.30,618/-), income from bank interest at Rs.17,667/- and LTCG (long term capital gains

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

house property at Rs.75,600/-, short term capital loss at (Rs.30,618/-), income from bank interest at Rs.17,667/- and LTCG (long term capital gains

ITO, WARD- 3(3), SRINAGAR vs. SMT. ZEENAB, BEMINA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the aforesaid reasons stated above

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhry

Capital Gain is deleted. Ground of appeal No. 5: The AO has denied the exemption u/s. 54F of the Income tax Act on the ground that the assessee had neither constructed any new house property

SMT. ZEENAB,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3),, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the aforesaid reasons stated above

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhry

Capital Gain is deleted. Ground of appeal No. 5: The AO has denied the exemption u/s. 54F of the Income tax Act on the ground that the assessee had neither constructed any new house property

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

House Property". 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law as apart from letting out of its godowns, no other services, were extended by the assessee to the lessees. Merely because one of the objectives was to let out the godown would not mean that the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

House Property". 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law as apart from letting out of its godowns, no other services, were extended by the assessee to the lessees. Merely because one of the objectives was to let out the godown would not mean that the assessee

MR.VISHAL BATRA,`LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

house property'. However, this is not an allowable deduction under the head 'capital gains’ as claimed by the assessee under

SH. RAGHUNATH SAHAI PURI(DECD),PATHANKOT vs. THE DEPTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATHANKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 633/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2007-08

capital gain arising out of the transaction, by virtue of which he has transferred his share in the property of M/s. Defence Services Co-op. House

SMT. INDERMEET BAINS W/O SH. D.S. BAINS,BATHINDA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BATHINDA

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the term indicated as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gain was liable on the sale of agriculture land by the assessee. 19. in the case of ‘G. Venkataswami Naidu & Co. Vs. CIT’, (1959) 25 ITR 594 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that If a person invests money in land intending to hold it, enjoys its income for some time, and then sells it as a profit

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. VIKAS MEHRA, THE MALL

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed being devoid of

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

properties are still existing as on date and are enjoyed by the family member of the assessee as residential houses. 13. As such, he submitted that in absence of any sale or transfer of any capital assets, there is no question of any capital gains

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR vs. M/S. ALI SHAH,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year : 2006-07

house and Gulmarg land/hut to the Tribunal with certain directions, which we will advert to at the appropriate stage. Ex consequenti, we are taking up the issue in pursuance of the directions given by the Hon'ble High Court. 3. Firstly, we will espouse the Saidakadal property. The Assessing Officer charged long-term capital gain

M/S SHANKAR RICE & GENERAL MILLS ,MOGA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, MOGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from ’other sources' because

SHRI RAKESH SABHARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 682/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Capital Gain from sale of property, and restricting cost of improvement based on rough paper without appreciating the facts of the case and submission of the assessee. Therefore, we decided to hear both the appeals together and disposed of by this common order for brevity. We have chosen to take I.T.A. No. 683/Asr/2019, Assessment Year: 2013-14 in Case

SHRI SUSHEEL SABHARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 682/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Capital Gain from sale of property, and restricting cost of improvement based on rough paper without appreciating the facts of the case and submission of the assessee. Therefore, we decided to hear both the appeals together and disposed of by this common order for brevity. We have chosen to take I.T.A. No. 683/Asr/2019, Assessment Year: 2013-14 in Case

SHRI BILAS CHAND,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD1(1), BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 399/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2016-17

capital gains arising to him on the sale of his residential house. Needless to add, a house property is inconceivable

SMT. AMITA NARANG,DELHI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 385/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

capital gain (STCG) arising on its’ transfer, which in the present case is by way of sale of a house property

SHRIMATI RITU KAPOOR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-III(2), SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

capital gain of the appellant. The appellant submits that if the amount deposited with National Housing Bank is reduced from 1/3rd share of the sale price of the property