SMT. RADHIKA ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

DR. PRANNOY ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

DR. PRANNOY ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

SMT. RADHIKA ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DR. PRANNOY ROY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. MRS. RADHIKA ROY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

4 Short-term capital gain are located to RS. 1.27 individuals for Prannoy Roy and Mrs Radhika Roy for assessment year 2009 – 10 in equal ratio to both The long-term capital gain/short-term capital gain accrued to Mrs Radhika Roy for FY 2008 – 09 needs to be modified as under:- Particulars amount in Crore Rs. serial number long-term capital

M/S. SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

gains in accordance with provisions of s. 11(1A)”. 11. The Ld. CIT(A), alternatively, applied Section 11(3) which will come into operation after five years on completion of five years of accumulation of income. So, no tax can be levied in assessment year under appeal. In fact, Section 11(3) is also not applicable in this case which

ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. THE SCIENTIFIC & EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

gains in accordance with provisions of s. 11(1A)”. 11. The Ld. CIT(A), alternatively, applied Section 11(3) which will come into operation after five years on completion of five years of accumulation of income. So, no tax can be levied in assessment year under appeal. In fact, Section 11(3) is also not applicable in this case which

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

4 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 assessee is very high with large volume of shares. He further noted that under the category of Long Term Capital Gain, assessee has sold shares of ‘Punjab Tractors Ltd.’ wherein assessee has earned profit of Rs.10.11 crores. The said transaction was carried out over the counter without paying STT. He also noted that assessee

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

4 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 assessee is very high with large volume of shares. He further noted that under the category of Long Term Capital Gain, assessee has sold shares of ‘Punjab Tractors Ltd.’ wherein assessee has earned profit of Rs.10.11 crores. The said transaction was carried out over the counter without paying STT. He also noted that assessee

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

4 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 assessee is very high with large volume of shares. He further noted that under the category of Long Term Capital Gain, assessee has sold shares of ‘Punjab Tractors Ltd.’ wherein assessee has earned profit of Rs.10.11 crores. The said transaction was carried out over the counter without paying STT. He also noted that assessee

SUPERB MIND HOLDING LTD. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE INT TAX 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1568/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

section 90 of the Income Tax Act, which provided a choice to assessee to adopt the Act or DTAA whichever is more beneficial, the assessee sought the benefit of India - Mauritius DTAA. Heavy reliance, is placed on the Protocol issued by Ministry of Finance dated 10.05.2016 and 29.08.2016, wherein, the “investments made prior to 01.04.2017 have been grandfathered” and even

M/S. GURU KRIPA AGRO FOODS,HARYANA vs. ITO, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

11. On careful consideration of the above, first of all, for ready reference, we find it appropriate to reproduce the provisions of section 45(4) and 2(47) of the Act as follows: “(4) The profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital

MDLR ESTATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

11) CIT Vs. Kunamkulam Mill Board 257 ITR 544 (Ker) 16. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that there is no estoppel against statue and mere declaration of capital gain in the return cannot be a ground to make addition on account of short term capital gain :- 1. CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills

MDLR BUILDERS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

11) CIT Vs. Kunamkulam Mill Board 257 ITR 544 (Ker) 16. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that there is no estoppel against statue and mere declaration of capital gain in the return cannot be a ground to make addition on account of short term capital gain :- 1. CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ECE INDUSTRIES LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

section 2 of the Insurance Act, 1938 (4 of 1938).” 15. Thus broadly speaking when profits or gains arise from the transfer of capital asset effected in the previous year, these profits are chargeable in income tax under the head „Capital Gains‟. To mean property of any account held by an assessee is ITA Nos.417

NEELU ANALJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with above directions

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishimrs. Neelu Analjit Singh, Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of 15, Dr. Apj Abdul Kalam Road, Income Tax , New Delhi Special Range-9, Pan: Aatps06882D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

4. During the year assessee has claimed income from capital gains on sale of shares of INR 202,09,06,647/- bifurcated into short-term capital gain of INR 12,89,00,542/– and the long-term capital gain of Rs . 189, 20, 06, 105/–. Assessee has sold 38235290 shares of Scorpio beverages private limited, having purchase cost

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ECE Industries Limited

4, 6 and 7), the State Bank of India Act, 1955 [Section 6(1)(g)], the State Bank Subsidiaries Banks Act, 1959 [Section 10(1)], the Backing Regulation Act. 1949 [Section 36AE(1)] and there have been legislative provisions for acquisition of some of these undertakings.” 18. Taking note of the various pronouncements in Para 164, the Supreme Court further