HET RAM SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, , SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

house (Exempt u/s 54 Rs. 15,35,000/- New Capital Gain Rs. NIL 4. The AO, on collecting information from the Land Acquisition Officer, Bilaspur, found that the details of compensation received by the assessee on account of acquisition of its property

DHEERUMAL SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

house (Exempt u/s 54 Rs. 15,35,000/- New Capital Gain Rs. NIL 4. The AO, on collecting information from the Land Acquisition Officer, Bilaspur, found that the details of compensation received by the assessee on account of acquisition of its property

SH. AMAR SINGH,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

gain arising from transfer of capital asset, on the entire sale consideration during the A.Y. 2007-08. Hence, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 11. The ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before authorities below. He has referred to PB-33 which is Sale Deed dated 20.03.2007 through which assessee received only meager advance

SH. JAI RAM,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

gain arising from transfer of capital asset, on the entire sale consideration during the A.Y. 2007-08. Hence, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 11. The ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before authorities below. He has referred to PB-33 which is Sale Deed dated 20.03.2007 through which assessee received only meager advance

S.SURJIT SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. PR.CIT-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

house on 29/02/2011 and claimed entire capital gain exempted under section 54 being amount deposited in capital gain account scheme on 12/09/2012 with maturity date of 12/09/2015. The assessment was finalized on 28/09/2018 and as per provisions of Section 54, there are time limits wherein the assessee is required to purchase a new residential property

TARUN JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

House Property, Short term capital gain on sale of gold coin/s and on the sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd.’, Long

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

House Property, Short term capital gain on sale of gold coin/s and on the sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd.’, Long

RAJNI JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

House Property, Short term capital gain on sale of gold coin/s and on the sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd.’, Long

SIKANDER SINGH MALUKA,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe I.T.O., Vs. Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ward 5(1), # 1370, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N & Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Vs. The I.T.O., # 1370, Sector 40-B, Ward 5(2), Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N

capital gains earned on sale of plots, raising the following grounds: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the parties had agreed for pro-rata transfer of land whereas by virtue of executing the Joint Development Agreement (JDA) read with possession letter and duly

ITO, W-4(3), CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. RACHNA ARORA, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

house property and not the amount of capital gain on sale of existing house property. Since, the relief has been

ITO, W-4, PANCHKULA vs. SMT. SEEMA BISHNOI, PANCHKULA

In the result appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargthe Ito Vs. Smt. Seema Bishnoi Ward-4, Panchkula H.No. 906, Sec-08, Panchkula

capital gains in purchase of a residential house within a period of one year before or two years from the date of sale of the original asset; or has within a period of three years constructed one residential house. ii. the assessee does not own more than one other house property

SHRI PARDEEP KUMAR JAIN,ZIRAKPUR vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 190/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, The Ito, Ward 2(3), बनाम Chandigarh Flat No.222, Orbit Apartments, 6Th Floor, Zirakpur "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Advpj6719P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

gain arises from ITA No. 190-Chd/2019 Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, Zirakpur 9 the transfer of a long-term capital asset, being buildings or lands appurtenant thereto, and being a residential house, the income of which is chargeable under the head "Income from house property

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

property at Palace Chamba; (ii) House No.127 at Golf Links; & (iii) Chamba House at 153, Golf Link. Accordingly, this alternative deduction was also denied to the assessee. 3.10 Finally, the assessment was framed wherein Taxable Long Term Capital Gains

SANJEEV KUMAR GOYAL,FATEHABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 20/01/2023 In Appeal No. 10853/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 20/01/2023 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order.

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because

KESHAV DUTT SHREEDHAR,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

house should be used for acquisition of the new asset, Section 54(1) would not have allowed adjustment and/or exemption in respect of property purchased one year prior to the transfer, which gave rise to the capital gain

SAHIBZADA TIMBER AND PLY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MOHALI vs. DCIT, ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 699/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Sahibzada Timber & Ply Private Limited B41-42, Phase-3, Indl. Aera, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAQCS2239G अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR Shri Dharam Vir, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He

House India Private Limited (Income Tax Appeal No. 110 of 2016 (O& M) dated 24/01/2017) brought to notice of both the parties during the course of hearing and both the parties were heard. The question for consideration before the Hon’ble High Court was whether for the purposes of computing the capital gains on sale of land and building

SH.ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA,LUDHIANA vs. PR.CIT-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

property as against modification of an old house beyond the stipulated time frame, we refer to the provisions of subsection (1) of section 54 of the Act which provides for purchase or construction of one residential house in India within stipulated time period and the appropriation of the capital gains

SH. SATPAL GOSAIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

House Building Society Ltd. in which the assessee owns a plot has been dealt with by the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Shri Charanjit Singh Atwal Vs. ITO in ITA No.66/Chd/2016 dated 20.4.2018. It was pointed out that the I.T.A.T. had held the issue of charging the capital gains earned on transfer of land made during the year