DHEERUMAL SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

deduction u/s 54 on the long term capital gain assessed by the AO while the short term capital gain assessed

SH. JAI RAM,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

capital gain on sale of agricultural land and in denying the deduction under section 54B of the Act. During the course

SH. AMAR SINGH,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

capital gain on sale of agricultural land and in denying the deduction under section 54B of the Act. During the course

RAJNI JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

deduction u/s 57 has been allowed, after raising a specific query. 2.4 Our attention was also drawn to the copy of the order sheet entries to substantiate that specific queries were raised by the AO in respect of long term capital gain

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

deduction u/s 57 has been allowed, after raising a specific query. 2.4 Our attention was also drawn to the copy of the order sheet entries to substantiate that specific queries were raised by the AO in respect of long term capital gain

TARUN JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

deduction u/s 57 has been allowed, after raising a specific query. 2.4 Our attention was also drawn to the copy of the order sheet entries to substantiate that specific queries were raised by the AO in respect of long term capital gain

SIKANDER SINGH MALUKA,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe I.T.O., Vs. Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ward 5(1), # 1370, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N & Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Vs. The I.T.O., # 1370, Sector 40-B, Ward 5(2), Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N

capital gain of Rs. 3,65,71,210/-. 6. That the Learned CIT(A) has wrongly rejected the additional evidence filed for claim u/s 54 EC on investment in REC Bonds. 7. That the Learned CIT(A) has wrongly upheld disallowance of deduction

SAHIBZADA TIMBER AND PLY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MOHALI vs. DCIT, ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 699/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Sahibzada Timber & Ply Private Limited B41-42, Phase-3, Indl. Aera, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAQCS2239G अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR Shri Dharam Vir, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He

capital gain shall be computed after making the following deductions from the full value of the consideration for which the sale

SH. PAWAN KUMAR,RAJPURA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, all the three captioned appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 433 /Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 बनाम Shri Mohinder Kumar, The Acit, #371, Dalima Vihar, Circle, Rajpaura 140401 Patiala Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aenpk2131D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Capital Gains which is arbitrary and unjustified. 433 to 435 -Chd-2024 Mohinder Singh, Rajpura & Ors, Rajpura 3 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the denial of deduction

SH. SURINDER KUMAR,RAJPURA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, all the three captioned appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 433 /Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 बनाम Shri Mohinder Kumar, The Acit, #371, Dalima Vihar, Circle, Rajpaura 140401 Patiala Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aenpk2131D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Capital Gains which is arbitrary and unjustified. 433 to 435 -Chd-2024 Mohinder Singh, Rajpura & Ors, Rajpura 3 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the denial of deduction

SH. MOHINDER KUMAR,RAJPURA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, all the three captioned appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 433 /Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 बनाम Shri Mohinder Kumar, The Acit, #371, Dalima Vihar, Circle, Rajpaura 140401 Patiala Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aenpk2131D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Capital Gains which is arbitrary and unjustified. 433 to 435 -Chd-2024 Mohinder Singh, Rajpura & Ors, Rajpura 3 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the denial of deduction

SH. AJAY KUMAR SINGHANIA,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Membe & Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountantmember Assessment Year : 2016-17

gains of the year against the brought forward short term capital loss of Rs. 4,86,524/- and claiming deduction

PREM SINGH,CHAMBA vs. ACIT CIRCLE PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

In the result, the appeal for AY 2017-18 stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 946/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 947/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle, Palampur बनाम/ The Palace. Chamba Himachal Pradesh - 176061 Vs. Himachal Pradesh – 176310 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Bharat Bhushan Garg (Cit) (Virtual) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13-01-2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Assessee Is In Further Appeals Before Us For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015-16 & 2017-18 Which Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 22-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 29-12-2017. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Computation Of Capital

capital gain, being entitled for deduction, while calculating the amount of capital gain. iv) Disallowing claim of Rs.5,37,533 spent

ACIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA vs. SHRI VINOD SHARMA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1449/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Acit, Vs. Shri Vinod Sharma, बनाम B-1/3, Circle, Safdarjang Enclave, Shimla New Delhi 110029 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abkps1560N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate With Shri Ahninav Bazwaria, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2024

Capital Gains from sale of shares, loss from house property and income from other sources. In this case, the Assessee filed his return of income declaring income at Rs. 89,59,650/- after claiming deduction

SMT. TEENA GARG,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

deduction and as such there is\nno question of any capital gain out of said transaction. The assessee\nin reply

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

deducting from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of the capital asset" the following amounts— Thus for the purpose of computing the capital gains

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

deducting from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of the capital asset" the following amounts— Thus for the purpose of computing the capital gains

ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

deducting from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of the capital asset" the following amounts— Thus for the purpose of computing the capital gains