SH. ASHISH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

capital gains on shares which have been duly offered in the original return of income and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT-III Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) has not been appreciated and considered properly by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore in absence of any incriminating evidence found during the course of search

SH. AKHIL JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

capital gains on shares which have been duly offered in the original return of income and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT-III Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) has not been appreciated and considered properly by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore in absence of any incriminating evidence found during the course of search

SH. BIPAN JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

capital gains on shares which have been duly offered in the original return of income and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT-III Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) has not been appreciated and considered properly by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore in absence of any incriminating evidence found during the course of search

SHRI MOHAN LAL GUPTA,SHIMLA vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

reassessment order so passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, the AO brought to tax capital gains

SHRI SATISH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 303/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satish Soin, बनाम The Acit, House No.31, Garden Enclave, Central Circle-2, Vs South City-Ii, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Advps6254N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan Garg, Cas राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing आदेश/Order Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

Capital Gain (LTCG) which is exempt from tax. The modus operandi adopted by the operators was to make the beneficiary buy some shares of a predetermined Penny stock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line through preferential allotment or off-line sale to save STT. The beneficiary

AMARJIT SINGH MARWAHA ,SHIMLA vs. ITO, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1379/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Amarjit Singh Marwaha, The Ito, Cottage No.1, Sadhora, Vs Ward-1, Mashobra, Baldeyan, Shimla. Shimla. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aeepm0161N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vishal Mohan Sr.Advocate, With Shri Abhinav Bijwaria, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026

Capital Gain in his computation of income but during the course of scrutiny assessment, he has filed the computation vide reply dated 10.11.2015, therefore, AO must have applied his mind and this assessment is being reopened after expiry of four years which cannot be done. 10. With the assistance of ld. Representative, I have gone through the record carefully

RAMA RANI,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 933/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ms. Rama Rani Dcit बनाम/ Vs. H. No 1058, Popular Enclave Circle 1(1), Sector 48-B, Chandigarh Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aerpr-2072-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ravinder Krishan (Advocate)– Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1 (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Vide Impugned Order Dated 14-03-2024 Proposing Revision Of Assessment As Framed By Ld. Ao U/S.147 Of The Act On 29-03-2022. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 98 Days In The Appeal, The Condonation Of Which Has Been Sought By Ld. Ar On The Strength Of Condonation Petition Which Is Accompanied By An Affidavit Of The Assessee. It Has Been Stated That The Assessee Was Not In India When

capital gains and sources of investment, the case was reopened and notice was issued u/s 142(1) calling for various details from the assessee. The assessee filed the documents / explanations and after due verification thereof, the returned income of Rs.104.40 Lacs was again accepted in reassessment

PAWAN KUMAR SINGLA,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CC-I, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal on the various grounds raised is dismissed

Bench: Final Hearing.

capital gains and other issues were upheld or dismissed due to lack of substantiation. 6. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. During proceedings before us, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee has filed a written submission which is as under: Briefly the facts of the case are that a search

PARVEEN KUMAR,229,VILLAGE MANAKPUR-II,TEHSIL JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT PANCHKULA, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

ANIL TUTEJA,FATEHABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

KARTAR SINGH, FATEHABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

RAM NIWAS,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, SIRSA ROAD, INDUSTRIAL AREA, FATEHABAD

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

SH. DEVENDER KUMAR,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD -1, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

MADHU GREWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

KARAN PRATAP SINGH,SIRSA, HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-1, SIRSA, HARYANA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

SH. RAM LAL,FATEHABAD vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

MANINDER JEET SINGH V.P.O. UDHAMGARH,JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed

RAKESH KUMAR,JAGADHRI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains" & Puneet Singh vs CIT, Karnal (2019) (415 ITR 215) (P&H HC) wherein it was held that “16. The Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in Manjeet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh vs. Union of India (Civil Writ. Petn. No. 15506 of 2013, decided on 14th Jan., 2014) against which the SLP having been dismissed