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

section 14A read with Rule 8D, takes into account only the interest component which can be attributed towards the income and not forming part of total income. It has nothing to do with the earning of interest income. 4. The Appellant craves to the allowed to amend, delete or add any other grounds of appeal during the course of hearing

PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember

section 143(3) of the Act on 14/01/2016, the Assessing Officer made certain additions/disallowances and assessed the 3 ITA No. 3785/Del./2017 total income at ₹ 15,35,95,820/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal

EMERGING INDIA FOCUS FUNDS,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAXATION 1(2)(2), DELHI

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

capital gains\nof Rs.310,80,53,009/- pertained to sale of units of mutual funds acquired prior\nto 01/04/2017 and hence, in respect of such gains, Article 13(3A) cannot be\napplicable. The relevant extract of the submissions of the assessee which were\nagain reasserted by ld. Sr. Counsel is reproduced as under:-\n\n• \"It is imperative to note

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

111A of the Act applicable from the AY 2005-06, the assessee cannot be categorised as an investor, especially when the aforesaid facts speak otherwise and the Id. AR did not place any material, other than resolution dated 22.4.2005, before us while the auditor reports and facts for the years under consideration reflecting intention of the assessee, lead

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 14A are mandatory provisions.” 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee in the Revenue’s Appeal submitted at the outset that identical issue came up in Assessee’s own case for Assessment Years 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 wherein the benefit of Long Term Gains arising

PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-20(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2014-15

section 143(3) of the Act on 23.12.2016, the Assessing Officer made certain additions/disallowances. The assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A) but did not find any favour. The appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved with the findings of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 3. Before us, learned Representative

SH. RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

capital gain on sale of such shares could fall within the ambit of Section 111A of the Act, and such

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHRI HARI INVESTMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue for both the assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gains. Section 111A stipulates that scripts and mutual funds that suffer securities transactions tax and held for 12 months

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHRI HARI INVESTMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue for both the assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gains. Section 111A stipulates that scripts and mutual funds that suffer securities transactions tax and held for 12 months

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MAHESH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

Capital Gain for taking the benefit of provisions of Section 111A of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following

ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), DELHI vs. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

section 143(3) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). During appellate proceedings also, the assessee filed written submission which has been incorporated by the Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.1 of his order. On consideration thereof, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the impugned income shown

PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Agrawal & Hon’Ble Shri K.N. Charypuran Associates Pvt. Vs Acit, Circle-20(1), Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi New Delhi Bhawan, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi Pan-Aaacp0458J (Appellant) (Respondent)

111A Short Term Capital Gain ORS -805443 -805443 1204173543 8. From the above, it is evident that the assessee has disclosed the total sale consideration i.e. without deducting the amount retained in escrow account and thereafter reduced the amount retained in escrow account claiming that the amount has not accrued as per ITAT Pune “B” Bench decision. During the assessment

VIC ENTERPRISES P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, Ground No.14 is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 111A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Assessee declared income from long term/short term capital gains

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, Ground No.14 is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 111A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Assessee declared income from long term/short term capital gains

SH CHAND RATTAN BAGRI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 5

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishichand Rattan Bagri, Acit, 4318/3, Ansari Road, Circle-3(1), Vs. Darya Ganj, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan:Aagpb1216K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Chand Rattan Bagri, Acit, 4318/3, Ansari Road, Circle-3(1), Vs. Darya Ganj, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan:Aagpb1216K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains" in terms of section 111A of Income Tax Act. 17. He further referred to the past history of the assessee

CIT vs. DEVASAN INVESTMENT PVT LTD

capital gain of ` 1,43,43,154/- on which tax was been paid under Section 111A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had raised

CIT vs. DEVASAN INVESTMENT PVT LTD

capital gain of ` 1,43,43,154/- on which tax was been paid under Section 111A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had raised

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSSURANCE CO.LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Dcit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, Ltu, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R

111A and / or section 112 of the Income Tax Act. 3. That on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding a disallowance of Rs 1,04,90,324/- out of the total depreciation allowance claimed by the appellant under section 32 of the Act. 3.1 That on facts and in law the AO / CIT(A) erred