Search: capital gains

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

ITA 992/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

ITA 1112/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

ITA 565/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

ITA 596/CHANDI/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

ITA 635/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

ITA 531/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

ITA 876/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

ITA 172/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

ITA 566/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains" 48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2.. 49. Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

M/S YOGRAJ CHAUDHARY,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-5, YAMUNA NAGAR

ITA 116/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBALA vs. NACHHATAR SINGH, AMBALA CANTT

ITA 613/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains\"\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

AMRINDER SINGH KHUBBER,AMBALA vs. ITO, W-5, AMBALA

Accordingly, finding no merit in the appeals, the same are hereby\ndismissed

ITA 1044/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Capital gains\"\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

SUSHMA,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD - 4, YAMUNA NAGAR, YAMUNA NAGAR

ITA 779/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains\"\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

SH. AMRIK SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-2, PANCHKULA

ITA 219/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

For Respondent: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate

Capital gains\"\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

BALVINDER SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. ITO WARD-1, FATEHABAD

ITA 153/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

SAT PAL,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(5), , CHANDIGARH

ITA 243/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Capital gains\"\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

JAGPAL SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(5), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 1184/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

AMRINDER SINGH KHUBBER,AMBALA vs. ITO, W-5, AMBALA

ITA 1043/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

RAJBIR SINGH,VILL. GARHI BANJARA vs. ITO, WARD-3, YAMUNANAGAR

ITA 208/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

AVTAR SINGH,VILLAGE MANAKPUR THAKUR DASS vs. ITO WARD-1, INCOME TAX OFFICE

ITA 656/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh