M/S SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

short term capital gain and bogus share capital / share premium/ unsecured loan. Such statements under Section 132(4) of the Act, by Shri

SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

short term capital gain and bogus share capital / share premium/ unsecured loan. Such statements under Section 132(4) of the Act, by Shri

BALDEEP SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 199/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Baldeep Singh, The Acit, C/O Tej Mohan Singh, बनाम Circle 5(1), Advocate Chandigarh Vs. #527, Sector 10-D. Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Adyps3636F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.09.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Of Addl./Jcit(A)-1. Nagpur For The A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

short term capital gains, long term capital gains and other sources Copy of Computation of Income

DESH MITTER GAIND,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA, HARYANA

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of Cit(A) Bearing No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-

capital gain u/s 50C 78,67,018/- 6. Less: already declared 4,46,788/- 7. Short term capital

GURMINDER SINGH,AMBALA CITY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AMBALA, AMBALA CANTT.

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.887/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sh. Gurminder Singh Ito Ward-2 बनाम/ Vs. H.No.1998, Sec.9, Urban Estate Ambala 133001 Ambala City – 134003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Cidps-7267-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Gurminder Singh (Assessee-In-Person) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Moatenla (Jcit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee In Captioned Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2024-25 Is Quantum Of Rebate U/S 87A. The Impugned Order Has Been Passed By Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nagpur [Cit(A)] On 27-05- 2025 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 23-03- 2025. Having Heard Rival Submissions, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

Short Term Capital Gains 2,247/- 4. Debt Short Term Capital Gains 7,607/- 5. Income

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

term capital gain or is short term capital gain. It was held a light or interest

SH. PARDEEP KUMAR,AMBALA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) of Rs. 7,60,000/- (18,00,000- 10,40,000) which has escaped

RAMKARAN SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

Bench: him and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified.

short term capital gains and not long term capital gain without considering the date of acquisition

ITO, WARD, PARWANOO vs. M/S PREETHI HIMACHAL & COMPANY, NALAGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Short Term Capital Gains and Long Term Capital Gains in respect of such transactions is in accordance

ITO, WARD, PARWANOO vs. M/S PREETHI HIMACHAL & COMPANY, NALAGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Short Term Capital Gains and Long Term Capital Gains in respect of such transactions is in accordance

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

short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 28.08.2025 passed for assessment year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has taken three grounds of appeal out of which, ground No. 3 is general ground which does not call for recording of any specific finding. A.Y.2013-14 2 3. In Ground No.1, assessee has challenged re-opening of assessment whereas in ground No. 2, assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. SUNIL KUMAR SOOD, PANCHKULA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 19.02.2024 passed for assessment year 2017-18. The Revenue has taken five grounds of appeal, which read as under : 1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,41,88,998/- made by the AO in the assessment order? A.Y.2017-18

JAGDISH CHAND ,MANDI GOBINDGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, MANDI GOBINDGARH , MANDI GOBINDGARH

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

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

short term capital gains earned on sale of property only on the basis of the findings of the assessing

DEVI DAYAL,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , KAITHAL

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 899/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devi Dayal, Vs The Ito, Pundri Anaj Mandi, Ward – 1, Kaithal-Haryana 136026. Kaithal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aajpd5851H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025

Term Capital Gain upon whom tax liability is to be discharged by the assessee/land owners. For buttressing this proposition, he took us through the alleged Collaboration Agreements as well as the following judgements : 1. CIT Vs Najoo Dara Deboo 218 taxman 473 Allahabad HC 2. Aarti Sanjay Kadam vs ITO 172 ITD 362 Mumbai ITAT 3. Seshasayee Steels

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

short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 28.11.2018 passed for assessment year 2012-13. ITA-303/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 2 2. The assessee has taken three grounds of appeal out of which Ground Nos. 1 and 3 are general in nature which do not call for recording of any specific finding. 3. In Ground No.2, assessee has pleaded that

ITO, SIRSA vs. SH. MAHABIR SINGH, SIRSA

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal of the Revenue

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 900/Chd/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Ito, Shri Mahabir Singh, Ward – 2, Vs S/O Shri Het Ram, Vpo Bani, Sirsa. Tehsil-Rania, Distt. Sirsa. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cdvpm5319N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vineet Krishan, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025

Short Term Capital Gain earned by the assessee on sale of agricultural land; b) The CIT (Appeals) has erred

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

terms of order passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act dt. 22/12/2017 which has since been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and against which, the assessee is in appeal before us. 48. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that Sh. Ajmer Singh is an agriculturist and do not have any other source of income

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

terms of order passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act dt. 22/12/2017 which has since been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and against which, the assessee is in appeal before us. 48. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that Sh. Ajmer Singh is an agriculturist and do not have any other source of income