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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

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

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

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

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

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

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

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

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

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

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

145B(1). In reply, the assessee reiterated that interest u/s 28 forms part of compensation and is exempt. The AO, however, held that section 10(37) applies only to capital gains

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n\n18\n\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

JARNAIL SINGH,VILLAGE BHAGWANPUR, KALKA vs. ITO, WARD-2, PANCHKULA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

LABH SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO 2,, PANCHKULA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

SH. AJIT SINGH,PINJORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANCHKULA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

NARENDER KAUR,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , KURUKSHETRA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

GURDEEP SINGH HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 5(5), CHANDIGARH

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n19\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

BALJIT SINGH,AMBALA CITY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMBALA, AMBALA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n18\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

RANJEET SINGH KHUBBER,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD 2, AMBALA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n18\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

RAGHBIR SINGH HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO-WARD-1(3), CHANDIGARH

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n18\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1

SARVAN SINGH,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 4, AMBALA

capital gains arising from\ncompulsory acquisition of agricultural land and does not extend to interest\nreceived on delayed payment of compensation.\n8. The appellate authority / CIT(A) further concurred with the AO's\nanalysis that section 145B(1