MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

section 12B of the Income-tax Act, 1922, itself were not applicable in the assessment year 1955-56." 9. We find that the Hon’ble Apex Court took into consideration the aspect that capital gains

ITA Nos. 601/2011 & 602/2011 vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.

The appeals are disposed of

section 12B, it provides for capital gains. Under that section the tax shall be payable by the assessee under the head

MILAN SAINI,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2 , GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Milan Saini, Vs. Dcit, 37, Centrum Plaza, Dlf Golf Circle-2. Course Road, Sector 53, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Haryana) Pan: Braps1366P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 12B provides that: (1) the tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head 'Capital gains' in respect

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), DELHI vs. HKT CORPORATION PVT LTD, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\nITA No.1036/Del/2024\nAssessment Year: 2020-21\n\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-11(1),\nDelhi\nVs.\nM/s. HKT Corporation Pvt.\nLtd.,\n7, South Patel Nagar,\nNew Delhi\nPAN: AACCH0308M\n\n(Appellant)\n\n(Respondent)\n\nAssessee by\nSh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv.\n\nDepartment by\nSh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR\n\nDate of hearing\n23.06.2025\n\nDate of pronouncement\n09.07.2025\n\nORDER\n\nPER SATBEER SINGH

Section 12B(2)(ii) of the Indian\nI.T. Act, 1922, for the purpose of determining the capital gain\nderived from

BHAGVAT SINGH,KHURJA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), BULANDSHAHR

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmabhagvat Singh, Vs. Ito, C/O. Jai Kisha, Adv, 86, Ward-1(3), Nai Basti, Khurja, Aligarh Bulandshahr (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dbwps8579E

section 12B of Indian Income tax Act, 1922, was considering as to what constitutes passing of title for the purpose of Capital Gains

VIDYA DEVI,KARNAL vs. ITO WARD - 4, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the AO is directed to delete the addition

Bench: Shri C. M. Gargvidya Devi, Vs. Ito, Vill. Kailash, Po Tikri, Ward-4, Karnal, Haryana Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fcbpd4813A Assessee By : Shri Satyam Aneja, Adv Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2023

section 12 other sources or 12B (Capital gain) of the Income Tax Act 1922, The Assessee after receiving their share

PREMRAJ SINGH,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royassessment Year: 2016-17

Capital Gains and claim of exemption made u/s 54F at Rs.1,15,82,877/-. On perusal of the documents/conveyance/purchase deed furnished by the assessee in support of his claim of exemption u/s 54F, it is found that the assessee had made investment in Plot bearing no. W12-12B, W, admeasuring 493.706 Sq. Mtrs. (590 Sq. Yards) situated at Parklands, Sector

M/S ACTIVE SECURITIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12B are intended merely to indicate the classes of income : the heads do not exhaustively delimit sources from which income arises." It was also held that: "even if an item of income is earned in the course of carrying on a business, it will not necessarily fall within the head "profits and gains of business" within the meaning of section