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 tax as permissible under section 54F of IT Act. 4. On the facts and in the circumstance of the case

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)

capital gains on sale of the land and super structure situated in Mohal Bakhai Tehsil Shimla amounting to Rs. 2,36,10,000/- and thereafter, after allowing transfer expenses of Rs. 27,00,000/-, index cost of Rs. 14,37,717/- (including CLU expenses of Rs 234,614) and deduction under Section 54F

SHRI PRINCEPREETJIT SINGH,RANJIT NAGAR vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

capital gains, claiming deductions under Sections 54B and 54F. 4 3.1 Subsequently, as part of the composite deal, the sale

SHEO RAM,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4 , YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 148 dated 13.09.2012. The AO has thereafter passed an assessment order on 30.03.2014 whereby LTCG liability was determined in the hands of the assessee. Such gain was determined at Rs.3,68,96,060/-. 3. Dissatisfied with the assessment order, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) and ultimately it travelled upto the Tribunal vide

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. POONAM KHETRAPAL SINGH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1000/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Dcit, Poonam Khetrapal Singh, बनाम Circle 1(1), H. No 816, Sector 16, Chandigarh Chandigarh. Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anqps6367R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Kumar Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15-05-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 29.7.2024 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

section and deny the capital gains, but during the period under consideration, the Assessee is very much entitled to make deposits of the sale proceedings in the capital gains account and claim deduction u/s 54F

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

Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The ld. AO has taken A.Y.2013-14 3 cognizance of the computation made by the assessee of alleged Long Term Capital Gain. The AO has observed that 50% share of the property falls in the hands of the assessee, thus, total sale consideration was Rs.38,75,000/-. He has given benefit of cost

SH. HARWANT SINGH GREWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD-7(4), LUDHIANA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 594/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Harwant Singh Grewal, The Ito, B-Xxxiv, # 8913, Durga Puri, Vs Ward 7(4), Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Adcpg7982Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

capital gain by Rs. 1,20,24,000/- on sale of land measuring 2 Kanals (1200 square yards) to Sh. Harish Singla, Joshi Nagar, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana and Sh. Bablesh Kumar, Deep Nagar, Ludhiana. Therefore an addition of Rs. 1,20,24,000/- is made in the total income of the assessee. B. Issue of deduction under section 54F

ITO, W-6(4), MOHALI vs. SHRI SANT SINGH, MOHALI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, as assessee did not attend the proceedings despite notice of service. The AO from perusal of bank statement noticed that there are credit entries in Joint Bank Account maintained by Sh. Sant Singh (Assessee), along with his mother Smt. Ajaib Kaur amounting to Rs. 5,54,05,000/-, during the Financial Year

DHARAM NATH S/O SH. KARAM CHAND,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

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

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

Gain (LTCG) on sale of land amounting to Rs. 12,95,080/-. As per AO, the land sold by the assessee is covered within the ambit of capital asset as per Section 2(14) as distance of land sold by the assessee in Village Jaroda / Jarodi falls within 8 Kilometers from the Municipal Limit of Jagadhri and thereafter considering

SUBHASH,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-3, YAMUNANAGAR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

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

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & One Of The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Relates To Non-Grant Of Deduction Under Section 54B & 54F Of The Act. 3. During The Course Of Appellate Proceedings, The Assessee Also Moved An Application Under Section 46A Of The Act Which Was Forwarded To The Ao & Remand

Capital Gain (LTCG). Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and one of the grounds raised by the assessee relates to non-grant of deduction under section 54B and 54F

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. DEEP KAUR PANNU THROUGH L/H RANJI SINGH PANNU & GURBILAS PLATO SINGH PANNU, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 987/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit, Deep Kaur Pannu, Circle 1(1), बनाम # 1070, Chandigarh Sector 15-B, Vs. Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abmpk1575B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Manoj Goyal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 24.7.2024 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

Capital Gain arose. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), in the facts and circumstances of case has erred in giving finding that the assessee is not liable for income from House Property i.e. H.No. 199, Tehsil Pura, at Amritsar, particularly in view of the facts that the said property was actually let out for rent to the tenant

ZAHID HASAN KHAN,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD -5, YAMUNA NAGAR

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

capital gain from sale of agriculture land. 3. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the actions of Ld AO of computing indexed cost of acquisition of the land at Rs. 6,41,457/- as against Rs. 1,10,14,333/- claimed by the assessee. 4. That the learned CIT(A) has erred

JAGDEV SINGH ,AMBALA vs. ITO WARD4 , YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

gain on sale of agricultural land is exempt under section 54B of Income Tax. The assessee has also purchased/ constructed residential out of sale proceeds of agricultural land & therefore the assesseeis also eligible for exemption u/s 54F of Income Tax Act. It was submitted that the Ld. AO has wrongly taken fair market value as on 01.04.1961 simply

SH. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

capital gains earned on the sale of the residential house in India. The Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’), however, denied the claim of deduction u/s 54 of the Act on two grounds ; i) The new residential house was not purchased in India ii) The house in question was purchased by the assessee in joint name with his wife