M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

SH. AJAY GOEL,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

50C are not applicable for the sale of assets which are part of stock in trade and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited issue to examine if the asset in question has been shown / reflected as stock in trade or in closing stock in the regular returns filed by the assessee and take

SH. MAHESH CHUGH,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

50C Rs. 4500000.00 Rs. 15500000.00 Rs. 9625000.00 Rs. 29625000.00 Less: Transfer Exp. Rs.00 Rs.00 Rs.00 Rs.00 Net Consideration Rs. 4500000.00 Rs. 15500000.00 Rs. 9625000.00 Rs. 29625000.00 Less: Indexed Cost Rs. 4864223.00 Rs. 2608917.00 Rs. 2064850.00 Rs. 9537990.00 Long Term Capital Rs. 12891083.00 Rs. 7560150.00 Rs. 20087010.00 (-) 364223.00 Gain/Loss Amount invested in Rs. 21735000.00 purchase of house property @ 75% share

SH. VINAY SINGAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

disallowance of Rs. 93,88,780/- u/s 14A as worked out by the Ld. Assessing Officer.” 19. It was common ground that the issues in ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in this appeal were similar to ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in ITA No.262/Chd/2015 adjudicated above .Our decision rendered therein at paras

SH. RAJEEV SINGAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

disallowance of Rs. 93,88,780/- u/s 14A as worked out by the Ld. Assessing Officer.” 19. It was common ground that the issues in ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in this appeal were similar to ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in ITA No.262/Chd/2015 adjudicated above .Our decision rendered therein at paras

SH. VINAY SINGAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

disallowance of Rs. 93,88,780/- u/s 14A as worked out by the Ld. Assessing Officer.” 19. It was common ground that the issues in ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in this appeal were similar to ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee in ITA No.262/Chd/2015 adjudicated above .Our decision rendered therein at paras

RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavi.T.A. No.1358/Chandi/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15

1,65,500/-. Once the assessee has furnished the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and after admitting the same, the Ld. CIT(A) has called for remand report from the Assessing officer, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A), in our view, ought to have looked into these documents. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and going

HARISH KUMAR,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(5) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.42/Chd/2025 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 बनाम Harish Kumar The Ito, 2439 Sector 50C, Ward 5(5) Chndigarh.160047 Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Advpk1006A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent ( Physicalhearing ) िनधा""रतीकीओरसे/Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Jain, C.A. राज"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl.Cit.Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26-05-2025 उदघोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30-05-2025 आदेश/Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20-12-2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi[Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Effective Grounds Of Appeal :-

50C, Ward 5(5) Chndigarh.160047 Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: ADVPK1006A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent ( PHYSICALHEARING ) िनधा""रतीकीओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Ajay Jain, C.A. राज"कीओरसे/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT.Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 26-05-2025 उदघोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 30-05-2025 आदेश/Order The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated