MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. " Similarly, the clarification for unlisted shares states: "It is, however, clarified that the above would not be necessarily applied in the situation where: (i) the genuineness of the transaction in unlisted shares itself is questionable; or (ii) the transfer of unlisted shares is related to an issue pertaining to lifting

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. REGENCY CREATIONS LTD

gains derived by an undertaking from export of articles or things or computer software manufactured or produced by it. The deduction is available for a period of ten consecutive assessment years beginning with the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the undertaking begins to manufacture or produce such articles or things or computer software. The tax benefit

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI vs. GENPACT INDIA NOW MERGED WITH GENPACT INDIA PVT. LTD.), HARYANA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

capital gain has not been assessed to tax. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual and legal position, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of learned first appellate authority. Ground raised is dismissed. 29. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 30. In ground nos. 1, 2 and 3, the assessee has challenged the decision

GENPACT INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

capital gain has not been assessed to tax. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual and legal position, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of learned first appellate authority. Ground raised is dismissed. 29. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 30. In ground nos. 1, 2 and 3, the assessee has challenged the decision

DCIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. CANON INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

10A 3,05,13,171 B Net PGBP Income from STPI Unit (b1-b2) 33,90,352 Total PGBP Income (A + B) (4,49,52,527) Income under the head 'Capital Gains (11,94,328) Income from other Sources 1,18,217 Total Income (4,48,34,310) 6. During the Assessment Year 2003-04, the assessee earned certain income

CANON INDIA PVT. LTD,GURUGRAM vs. NEAC, DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

10A 3,05,13,171 B Net PGBP Income from STPI Unit (b1-b2) 33,90,352 Total PGBP Income (A + B) (4,49,52,527) Income under the head 'Capital Gains (11,94,328) Income from other Sources 1,18,217 Total Income (4,48,34,310) 6. During the Assessment Year 2003-04, the assessee earned certain income

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NUWAVE E SOLUTIONS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Acit, Vs M/S. Nuwave E Solutions (P) Circle-13(1), Ltd., 3Rd Floor, District Centre, New Delhi Dda Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Pan-Aabcn5790Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gutpa, Adv., Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 15.03.2011 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Xvi, New Delhi [“Cit(A)”, In Short] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2010 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & E- Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.08.2007, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 1,45,48,453/-. The Said Return Was Revised On 20.08.2008, Declaring The Same Income As Was Declared The Return Of Income Filed U/S 139(1). The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Various Queries Were Raised Which Were Replied By The Assessee. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Export Of Software & 100% Eou Registered With Director Software Technology Park Of India In Terms Of Registration Certificate Dated 31.03.1999. The Major Shareholder In The Assessee Company Is Shri Anil Gutpa Who Is Having 99% Shareholding & Is Taking Substantial Interest In Day-To-Day Affairs Of The Assessee & Also In Its Associate Enterprises (“Ae”) At Us Who Is The Sole Buyer Of The Software Developed By The Assessee.

10A. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on the basis of the TDS deducted by the assessee on buy back of shares from Dr. Anil Gupta @10% instead of applicable TDS rate on long-term capital gain @20% under Section

NIHO CONSTRUCTION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 18(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Acit, Vs M/S. Nuwave E Solutions (P) Circle-13(1), Ltd., 3Rd Floor, District Centre, New Delhi Dda Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Pan-Aabcn5790Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gutpa, Adv., Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 15.03.2011 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Xvi, New Delhi [“Cit(A)”, In Short] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2010 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & E- Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.08.2007, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 1,45,48,453/-. The Said Return Was Revised On 20.08.2008, Declaring The Same Income As Was Declared The Return Of Income Filed U/S 139(1). The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Various Queries Were Raised Which Were Replied By The Assessee. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Export Of Software & 100% Eou Registered With Director Software Technology Park Of India In Terms Of Registration Certificate Dated 31.03.1999. The Major Shareholder In The Assessee Company Is Shri Anil Gutpa Who Is Having 99% Shareholding & Is Taking Substantial Interest In Day-To-Day Affairs Of The Assessee & Also In Its Associate Enterprises (“Ae”) At Us Who Is The Sole Buyer Of The Software Developed By The Assessee.

10A. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on the basis of the TDS deducted by the assessee on buy back of shares from Dr. Anil Gupta @10% instead of applicable TDS rate on long-term capital gain @20% under Section

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GENPACT INDIA, GURGAON

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12

Capital International Services) AY 2011-12 assessee has sought to claim higher deduction u/s 10a for an income which was not derived by the undertaking in the STP area. These receipts are liable to be taxed as non-10A income and only those expenditure which are wholly and exclusively incurred for earning this income are to be excluded. Perusal

MS. GENPACT INDIA,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12

Capital International Services) AY 2011-12 assessee has sought to claim higher deduction u/s 10a for an income which was not derived by the undertaking in the STP area. These receipts are liable to be taxed as non-10A income and only those expenditure which are wholly and exclusively incurred for earning this income are to be excluded. Perusal

SRF LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

10A(1A) being the difference of eligible deduction Rs.78,29,37,496/-, and deduction actually claimed Rs.69,93,08,277/- by the assessee in its return of income due to a pure calculation error. d) exclusion of Rs.3,21,55,428/- received by the assessee on account of interest subsidy under Technology Up gradation Fund (TUF) its being a capital

SRF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

10A(1A) being the difference of eligible deduction Rs.78,29,37,496/-, and deduction actually claimed Rs.69,93,08,277/- by the assessee in its return of income due to a pure calculation error. d) exclusion of Rs.3,21,55,428/- received by the assessee on account of interest subsidy under Technology Up gradation Fund (TUF) its being a capital

BRAHAM DUTT VASHIST,GURGAON vs. ITO-WARD -1(3),GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 170/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Braham Dutt Vashist, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca M. R. Sahu, Ward-1(3), H. No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector-10A, Gurgaon-122001 Near G. D. Goenka Public School, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Affpv0127D Assessee By: Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1083989454(1) Dated 23.12.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

10A, Gurgaon-122001 Near G. D. Goenka Public School, Gurgaon-122001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AFFPV0127D Assessee by: Sh. M. R. Sahu, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083989454

SURENDER KUMAR,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 4 (1),GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

10A, Nr. G.D.\nGoenka Public School,\nGurgaon\nPAN: AUMPK7509E\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-4(1),\nGurgaon\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by\nSh. M.R. Sahu, CA\nDepartment by\nSh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR\nDate of hearing\n26.06.2025\nDate of pronouncement\n30.06.2025\nORDER\nPER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM\nThis assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises\nagainst

SANJAY,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 4(1)-GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 5952/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Sanjay Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca, M. R. Sahu, Ward-4(1), House No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector- Gurgaon, 10A, Near G. D. Goenka Public Haryana-122050 School, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Eqsps3018G Assessee By : Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca & Sh. Sudhir Yadav, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2025 Order

10A, Near G. D. Goenka Public Haryana-122050 School, Gurgaon-122001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. EQSPS3018G Assessee by : Sh. M. R. Sahu, CA & Sh. Sudhir Yadav, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 30.10.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi

ACIT,CIRCLE-30(1), NEW DELHI vs. AKASH PODDAR, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

capital gains or not. 5 Akash Poddar 9. The provisions of Section 17(3)(iii) reads as under: “Section 17………. (3) "profits in lieu of salary" includes— (i) the amount of any compensation due to or received by an assessee from his employer or former employer at or in connection with the termination of his employment or the modification

PINE PACKAGING PRIVATE LIMITED

10A or section 10B, in relation to the profits and gains of the undertaking or enterprise. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no deduction shall be allowed to any undertaking or enterprise under this section, where the total period of deduction inclusive of the period of deduction under this section, or under the second proviso to sub-section

RATNA MATHUR,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Ratna Mathur, Vs Pr.Cit, M-22, Malviya Nagar, Noida. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Abdpm8120F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.B.Mathur, Ca Respondent By Shri Amitabh Kumar Sinha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm By Way Of This Present Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Passed By Ld. Pr. Cit, Noida Dated 29.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

10A) or 10(10D) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on surrender value as is evident from the computation of Income Tax Return on record. (6) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend or vary any of the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 2 | P a g e 2. The only effective

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V vs. QUALCOMM INDIA PVT.LTD.

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

Capital gains Income from other sources 5.2 The income computed under various heads of income in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV of the Income-tax Act shall be aggregated in accordance with the provision of Chapter VI of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This means that first the income/loss from various sources, i.e. eligible and ineligible units, under