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

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

217 platform for exchange of talent ranging from creativity of words to expression in writing attended by Finest Business Schools from India 7 Convocation ceremony wherein Mrs. Malvika Rai is seen 218 with Kumari Selja, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Urban Employment and Prof. Badal Mukherji, Ex Director, Delhi School of Economics 9 Graduation ceremony of students of IILM

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

217 platform for exchange of talent ranging from creativity of words to expression in writing attended by Finest Business Schools from India 7 Convocation ceremony wherein Mrs. Malvika Rai is seen 218 with Kumari Selja, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Urban Employment and Prof. Badal Mukherji, Ex Director, Delhi School of Economics 9 Graduation ceremony of students of IILM

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

217 platform for exchange of talent ranging from creativity of words to expression in writing attended by Finest Business Schools from India 7 Convocation ceremony wherein Mrs. Malvika Rai is seen 218 with Kumari Selja, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Urban Employment and Prof. Badal Mukherji, Ex Director, Delhi School of Economics 9 Graduation ceremony of students of IILM

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

217 platform for exchange of talent ranging from creativity of words to expression in writing attended by Finest Business Schools from India 7 Convocation ceremony wherein Mrs. Malvika Rai is seen 218 with Kumari Selja, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Urban Employment and Prof. Badal Mukherji, Ex Director, Delhi School of Economics 9 Graduation ceremony of students of IILM

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

217 platform for exchange of talent ranging from creativity of words to expression in writing attended by Finest Business Schools from India 7 Convocation ceremony wherein Mrs. Malvika Rai is seen 218 with Kumari Selja, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Urban Employment and Prof. Badal Mukherji, Ex Director, Delhi School of Economics 9 Graduation ceremony of students of IILM

ESSAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (2)(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 6(3) ECL of the Indian Income Tax Act, Article 4(3) of India Para 44-47 (page 173-175) Mauritius Treaty, place of effective management, ECOM circular 1 of 2023 clarifying that in the case of findings of facts by the assessing officer establishing dual residence, place of effective management to be the governing criteria for residence

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

c) of the lease agreement, the lessee had to take prior written consent from the Assessee for sub-letting or parting with possession of the premises at 2015:DHC:8039-DB ITA Nos. 38 of 2002 & 132 of 2002 Page 9 of 32 Bhiwadi. No such consent had been taken. The questions raised by the AO remained to be satisfactorily

CIT vs. M/S TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

c) of the lease agreement, the lessee had to take prior written consent from the Assessee for sub-letting or parting with possession of the premises at 2015:DHC:8039-DB ITA Nos. 38 of 2002 & 132 of 2002 Page 9 of 32 Bhiwadi. No such consent had been taken. The questions raised by the AO remained to be satisfactorily

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

c) of the lease agreement, the lessee had to take prior written consent from the Assessee for sub-letting or parting with possession of the premises at 2015:DHC:8039-DB ITA Nos. 38 of 2002 & 132 of 2002 Page 9 of 32 Bhiwadi. No such consent had been taken. The questions raised by the AO remained to be satisfactorily

SMT. HARMINDER KAUR,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

217 ( P & H) and CIt vs jagriti Aggarwal (supra). The relevant finding of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Jagriti Aggarwal (supra) has held that “Sub-s. (4) of s. 139 is in fact, a proviso to sub-s. (1) and provides for extension of period of due date for filing the return in certain

CHANDER KALAN,DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

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

c. The decision of the Gujarat High Court was before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as C.A. No. 017147 of 2017 in a batch of petition with the lead matter being Union of India vs. Hari Singh and Ors. being CA No. 17041 of2017 (at para 11) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision dated 15.09.2017 referred

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. SEEMA SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

gains were declared at Rs. 1,09,98,256/-, out of which a sum of Rs. 1 Crore was claimed as a deduction under section 54EC of the Act, by purchase of REC bonds worth Rs. 50 Lakhs each on 31.03.2009 and 30.04.2009. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the High Court affirmed its earlier above-cited decision

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI AKSHAY SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the 02 appeals filed by the Revenue stand

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

gains were declared at Rs. 1,09,98,256/-, out of which a sum of Rs. 1 Crore was claimed as a deduction under section 54EC of the Act, by purchase of REC bonds worth Rs. 50 Lakhs each on 31.03.2009 and 30.04.2009. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the High Court affirmed its earlier above-cited decision

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI PRADEEP SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the 02 appeals filed by the Revenue stand

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

gains were declared at Rs. 1,09,98,256/-, out of which a sum of Rs. 1 Crore was claimed as a deduction under section 54EC of the Act, by purchase of REC bonds worth Rs. 50 Lakhs each on 31.03.2009 and 30.04.2009. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the High Court affirmed its earlier above-cited decision

RAJ KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-58(4), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

217 ( P & H) and CIt vs jagriti Aggarwal (supra). The relevant finding of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Jagriti Aggarwal (supra) has held that “Sub-s. (4) of s. 139 is in fact, a proviso to sub-s. (1) and provides for extension of period of due date for filing the return in certain

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

capital, transportation, level of the market, i.e. retail or wholesale and so forth. The Rules and the analytical steps. 71. Sub-Sections (1) and (2) to Section 92C are applicable to the assessed, as well as the Assessing Officer invoking power under Sub-Section (3) to Section 92C of the Act. As noted above, sub-section (2) to Section

PHILLIP KOSHY,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.415/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Phillip Koshy, Dcit, C/O K B Chandna & Co., E-27, Vs. Central Circle-29, Ndse-Ii, Delhi. Delhi. Pan No. Armpk8500C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

capital gain is not to be charged under Section 45 of the said Act. 24. For the reasons discussed above, the appeal is allowed. The questions framed above are answered in favour of the appellant assessee and against the respondent revenue. The first question is answered in the affirmative and the second question is answered in the negative. No costs