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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

22 taxmann 11 and held that the transaction shown as long-term capital gain are nothing but Sham transactions which have been manipulated to avoid the tax arising on the transfer of shares of NDTV limited. vii. That assessee is a director of NDTV limited and holding a substantial stake and is in a position that she can influence

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

22 taxmann 11 and held that the transaction shown as long-term capital gain are nothing but Sham transactions which have been manipulated to avoid the tax arising on the transfer of shares of NDTV limited. vii. That assessee is a director of NDTV limited and holding a substantial stake and is in a position that she can influence

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

22 taxmann 11 and held that the transaction shown as long-term capital gain are nothing but Sham transactions which have been manipulated to avoid the tax arising on the transfer of shares of NDTV limited. vii. That assessee is a director of NDTV limited and holding a substantial stake and is in a position that she can influence

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

22 taxmann 11 and held that the transaction shown as long-term capital gain are nothing but Sham transactions which have been manipulated to avoid the tax arising on the transfer of shares of NDTV limited. vii. That assessee is a director of NDTV limited and holding a substantial stake and is in a position that she can influence

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

22 taxmann 11 and held that the transaction shown as long-term capital gain are nothing but Sham transactions which have been manipulated to avoid the tax arising on the transfer of shares of NDTV limited. vii. That assessee is a director of NDTV limited and holding a substantial stake and is in a position that she can influence

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

22,70,962 19,21,580 21 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 Percentage of Capital gain to Total capital gain 98.34% 0.70% 0.16% 0.17% 0.18% 0.15% *inclusive of shares of Dabur India Ltd., Punjab Tractors Ltd. and ABN Amro Securities Pvt. Ltd. Total Capital Gain Rs. Long Term Capital Gain claimed exempt u/s.10(38) 1,06,78,21,147 Long Term

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

22,70,962 19,21,580 21 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 Percentage of Capital gain to Total capital gain 98.34% 0.70% 0.16% 0.17% 0.18% 0.15% *inclusive of shares of Dabur India Ltd., Punjab Tractors Ltd. and ABN Amro Securities Pvt. Ltd. Total Capital Gain Rs. Long Term Capital Gain claimed exempt u/s.10(38) 1,06,78,21,147 Long Term

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

22,70,962 19,21,580 21 I.T.A. No.3078/Del/2011, 820/Del/2013 & 5054/Del/2015 Percentage of Capital gain to Total capital gain 98.34% 0.70% 0.16% 0.17% 0.18% 0.15% *inclusive of shares of Dabur India Ltd., Punjab Tractors Ltd. and ABN Amro Securities Pvt. Ltd. Total Capital Gain Rs. Long Term Capital Gain claimed exempt u/s.10(38) 1,06,78,21,147 Long Term

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ECE INDUSTRIES LTD.

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

Section 48 is as under: Provided further that where long-term capital gain arises from the transfer of a long-term capital asset, other than capital gain arising to a non-resident from the transfer of ITA Nos.417 of 2007 & 1069 of 2007 Page 14 of 22

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)

22,94 Mrs. Neelu Analjit Singh, Vs The Additional CIT , New Delhi 2 The AO, required the assessee to explain as to why the sale of shares of SBPL should not be taxed as short term capital gain in view of the provision of section

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ECE Industries Limited

section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, the long term capital gains has to be computed in relation to transfer of this unit. The assessee has given a computation of capital gain which has been reproduced by us in para 22

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 9(1)(i) of the Act, capital gain arising through or from the transfer of a capital asset situated in India would be deemed to accrue or arise in India in all cases irrespective of whether the capital asset is movable or immovable, tangible or intangible; the place of registration of the document of transfer etc. is in India

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

22,068/- as the written down value of the said plant and equipment was Rs.98,72,820/-. 5. After setting off short term capital loss of Rs.89, 459/-on the sale of furniture and fixtures, the short term capital gains was ITA Nos. 601/2011 & 602/2011 Page 3 of 23 shown as Rs.1,32,32,609/- chargeable under Section

CIT vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

The appeals are disposed of

Section 32 and accordingly compute and decide 2012:DHC:2611-DB ITA Nos. 601/2011 & 602/2011 Page 22 of 23 whether short term capital gains

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

The appeals are disposed of

Section 32 and accordingly compute and decide 2012:DHC:2611-DB ITA Nos. 601/2011 & 602/2011 Page 22 of 23 whether short term capital gains

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

The appeals are disposed of

Section 32 and accordingly compute and decide 2012:DHC:2611-DB ITA Nos. 601/2011 & 602/2011 Page 22 of 23 whether short term capital gains

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)

gains and was in effect a capital receipt. The relevant extracts of the judgement are reproduced hereunder: "7. We are, therefore, left with the question as to whether the right to claim damages in the instant case is a 'property of any kind and thus, a 'capital asset' under section 2(14)of the Act. The further question

MR. SUNIL GOYAL,NOIDA vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Appeal is disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 28(va) of the Act, the case of the Ld. counsels is that the action of the AO in so far as he wanted to split the consideration in two parts, i.e. capital gains and business income was not in accordance with the law. The Ld. counsels further submit that the conditions/restrictions placed on the management vendors were only