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

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

short period of time against their fundamentals and meager Financials. 4.4 The ld. CIT(A) further held that the appellant, alongwith his family members, had followed the above modus operandi consistently for various AYs by entering into transactions of penny stocks and earning huge Long Term Capital Gain, which were not genuine on the face itself; that the onus

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 period of time against their fundamentals and meager Financials. 4.4 The ld. CIT(A) further held that the appellant, alongwith his family members, had followed the above modus operandi consistently for various AYs by entering into transactions of penny stocks and earning huge Long Term Capital Gain, which were not genuine on the face itself; that the onus

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 gains that has arisen to it on this immovable property during the F.Y. 2010-11 by taking sale price at Rs.2,42,00,000/-. The question is when long term gain or short term gain arises. It is on the date on which an asset (whether long term or short term) is transferred

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

short 'the Act'). 3. The only issue on which the Department has filed this appeal is regarding the decision of the CIT(A) holding that the case under consideration is a construction of a house and not purchase of house though the said construction made by the Assessee is not regarding purchase of land or getting a house constructed

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

transfer would amount to a gift liable to tax under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, but if the construction of sub-section (2) contended for on behalf of the Revenue were accepted, such difference would also be liable to be added as part of capital gains taxable under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This would

ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

transfer would amount to a gift liable to tax under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, but if the construction of sub-section (2) contended for on behalf of the Revenue were accepted, such difference would also be liable to be added as part of capital gains taxable under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This would

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

transfer would amount to a gift liable to tax under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, but if the construction of sub-section (2) contended for on behalf of the Revenue were accepted, such difference would also be liable to be added as part of capital gains taxable under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This would

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

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

transferring its business on slump sale basis to Preeti Kitchen Appliances Private Limited. The purchase price for such slump sale was agreed at Rs.184,59,00,000/-, with Rs.161,51,62,500/- received in FY 2011-12 and the remaining amount was kept in escrow and received in FY 2012-13. The said amount was invested in securities (shares/mutual funds/bonds

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

transferring its business on slump sale basis to Preeti Kitchen Appliances Private Limited. The purchase price for such slump sale was agreed at Rs.184,59,00,000/-, with Rs.161,51,62,500/- received in FY 2011-12 and the remaining amount was kept in escrow and received in FY 2012-13. The said amount was invested in securities (shares/mutual funds/bonds

SURESH KUMAR,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, W-4, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

price during the pendency of the land acquisition proceedings. It is a measure to offset the effect of inflation and the continuous rise in the value of properties. [See: State of Tamil Nadu and others etc. v. L. Krishnan and others etc. - AIR 1996 SC 497]. Therefore, the amount payable under Section

PARAS AND SHUBHAM CHAUDHARY LEGAL HEIR OF KANHAIYA LAL,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

price during the pendency of the land acquisition proceedings. It is a measure to offset the effect of inflation and the continuous rise in the value of properties. [See: State of Tamil Nadu and others etc. v. L. Krishnan and others etc. - AIR 1996 SC 497]. Therefore, the amount payable under Section

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

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

short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 12.12.2023 passed for assessment year 2007-08. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal. However, in brief, grievance of the assessee is that capital gain on sale of agriculture land in Village Jaroda, District Yamuna A.Y.2007-08 2 Nagar deserves to be assessed in assessment year 2007-08 or in subsequent year i.e. assessment year

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

short question of law which needs consideration is as to whether the tax at source is to be deducted on the amounts which are paid as compensation or enhanced compensation, etc., on account of compulsory acquisition of land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 3. An admitted fact which is common in all these appeals is that while

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

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

short question of law which needs consideration is as to whether the tax at source is to be deducted on the amounts which are paid as compensation or enhanced compensation, etc., on account of compulsory acquisition of land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 3. An admitted fact which is common in all these appeals is that while

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

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

short question of law which needs consideration is as to whether the tax at source is to be deducted on the amounts which are paid as compensation or enhanced compensation, etc., on account of compulsory acquisition of land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 3. An admitted fact which is common in all these appeals is that while

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

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

short question of law which needs consideration is as to whether the tax at source is to be deducted on the amounts which are paid as compensation or enhanced compensation, etc., on account of compulsory acquisition of land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 3. An admitted fact which is common in all these appeals is that while