DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MOHINDER PURI, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus land development expenditure.” 4. The facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and filed return of income on 31.01.2007 declaring total income of Rs.55,94,790/- which was later revised to Rs.55,94,770/-. The total income included long term capital gain of Rs.37,12,316/- on the sale of land admeasuring 1.31 acres at village

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ARJUN PURI, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus land development expenditure.” 4. The facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and filed return of income on 31.01.2007 declaring total income of Rs.55,94,790/- which was later revised to Rs.55,94,770/-. The total income included long term capital gain of Rs.37,12,316/- on the sale of land admeasuring 1.31 acres at village

SRI OMKAR CHADHA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 346/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Omkar Chadha, Vs Income Tax Officer, I-39, Jangpura Extn., Ward-54(3), New Delhi-110014 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepc8329G Assessee By : Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2020

purchased by the assessee are adjacent to one another and have a common me point, the deduction cannot be denied. 14. In the case of Anand Basappa 91 ITD 53, the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT at Bangalore observed as to whether 'a residential house' should be treated as 'one residential house' or whether 'more than one residential house

VIPUL KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

section 54F. He, therefore, made an addition of Rs. 9,54,544/- to the total income of the assessee. 11 11. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO by observing as under: - “Ground no. 3 : is against disallowance of Rs. 9,54,544/- u/s 54F. As mentioned above the assessee had claimed deduction

ACIT CIRCLE-19(2), NEW DELHI vs. LOKVIR KAPOOR, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishilokvir Kapoor, Vs. Acit, C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi Circle-19(2), Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Lokvir Kapoor, Circle-19(2), C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi New Delhi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent)

54F of the act was also denied. 18. The assessee approached the learned CIT – A, he held that the book value of the shares that were transferred is INR 1 22/– per share, value of the share as per the valuation report on the discounted cash flow method is INR 2 23.24 per share and the sale price

LOKVIR KAPOOR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishilokvir Kapoor, Vs. Acit, C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi Circle-19(2), Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Lokvir Kapoor, Circle-19(2), C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi New Delhi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent)

54F of the act was also denied. 18. The assessee approached the learned CIT – A, he held that the book value of the shares that were transferred is INR 1 22/– per share, value of the share as per the valuation report on the discounted cash flow method is INR 2 23.24 per share and the sale price

HUKAM SINGH,REWARI vs. ITO, WARD-1, REWARI

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the respective assesses are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

purchased by the appellant. That as per law applicable to assessment year, the appellant is entitled to the claim deduction under Section 54F for two houses. The appellant craves for permission to add, delete or amend the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal. Under the circumstances it is prayed that the appeal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MR.VIPIN BATRA

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN

bogus transactions relating to sale and purchase of shares were done through ITA No.1189/2006 Page 8 of 10 this bank account and most of the beneficiaries have availed relief under Section 54F

SH. PRAVEEN KUMAR MALHOTRA,DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 16, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year: 2012-13

bogus, then the full value of the consideration received or accruing cannot be disturbed. This is clearly evident from the terms expressed in section 48 which reads as under:- “The income chargeable under the head “Capital gains” shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer

SMT. NEELAM MALHOTRA,DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 16, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year: 2012-13

bogus, then the full value of the consideration received or accruing cannot be disturbed. This is clearly evident from the terms expressed in section 48 which reads as under:- “The income chargeable under the head “Capital gains” shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-16 vs. SH. PRAVEEN KUMAR MALHOTRA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

bogus, then the full value of the consideration received or accruing cannot be disturbed. This is clearly evident from the terms expressed in section 48 which reads as under:- "The income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration. received or accruing as a result of the transfer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASI

Appeals are allowed

bogus claims of Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S NALWA INVESTMENT LTD.

Appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

bogus claims of Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S MANSAROVAR INVESTMENTS LTD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

bogus claims of Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S ABHUINANDAN INVESTMENTS LT

Appeals are allowed

bogus claims of Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S MANSAROVAR INVESTMENTS LTD

Appeals are allowed

bogus claims of Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall

DEEPAK NAGAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT , CC-17, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2015-16] Shri Deepak Nagar Vs. The A.C.I.T C-1/67, Safdarjang Development Area Central Circle -17 New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaipn 5965 B [Appellant] [Respondent]

purchased on 13.02.2013 when certificates were received by the assessee on 22.03.2013 were demated on 30.4.2013, which means that immediately after receiving share certificates, the assessee dematerialised the same, which is evident from the demat statement exhibited at pages 10 to 12 of the paper book. 13. When Malti Textiles Mills Ltd became ETTL, the split shares were credited

AMAR NATH TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2009-10

purchase as 1980 for the purpose of indexation and after claiming exemption u/s. 54F of the Act for construction of existing residential accommodation, declared the long-term capital gains at Rs. Nil. The Assessing Officer by observing that the bills and vouchers furnished by the Assessee in support of the construction made by Assessee are bogus and fictitious and, therefore