DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income. 9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic business activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on capital account and not as “stock-in-trade”. 9.4 That the assessing officer erred

M/S MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

capital gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income.\n9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that\ninvestment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic\nbusiness activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on\ncapital account and not as “stock-in-trade”.\n9.4 That the assessing officer

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

Capital Gains”. 2.1 Without prejudice, that on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of AO in denying benefit of exemption u/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. 2.2 Without prejudice, on facts and in law the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of AO in denying benefit of concessional rate

THE GOLDEN STATE CAPITAL PTE LTD,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshthe Golden State Capital Pte Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 31, Tanglin Road, #03,-04, St. Circle-3(1)(1), Regis Residences, Singapore, International Taxation, Singapore, Singapore, 247912 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aagct8026Q Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv Shri Anmol, Adv Shri Priya, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 31/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23/08/2023

capital gains of INR 61,71,789/- and taxing the same in the hands of the Appellant in India. 18. That the AO has grossly erred in disregarding the premium paid for calculating cost of acquisition, in complete contradiction to the DRP Directions, thereby violating the mandate of section 144C(13) of the ITA. 19. That the conclusions

VACHASPATI SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -4(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

234D of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend, or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing or before decision of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a farmer. He has furnished his original return of income for A.Y.2019-20

MADHURITTU PURI,UNITED KINGDOM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2)(2) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

capital gain is very excessive. 6. That the levy of interest under section 234D of Rs.9,00,769 is illegal

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 gain and has further erred in not allowing the exemption of Rs. 1,15,82,887/- claimed by the assessee u/s 54F of the Act, more so when all the conditions laid down under the section have been fulfilled and impugned addition has been made by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice

DILIP KAPUR,UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(2) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarshri Sudhir Pareek

capital gain. Page 2 of 11 ITA No.- 2059/Del/2023 Dilip Kapur 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the contention of the assessee that the report has been made by the DVO without considering the comparable instances as well as certified copies of sale deeds

ASHOK KUMAR DHINGRA ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

234D as applicable as per provisions of the Act. Issue necessary forms i.e. Demand notice, challans etc. 30. At the same time to conclude that interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is to be treated as income from other sources and not under the head capital gains the ld CIT(A) while exercising

SATISH KUMAR DHINGRA ,HARYANA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

234D as applicable as per provisions of the Act. Issue necessary forms i.e. Demand notice, challans etc. 30. At the same time to conclude that interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is to be treated as income from other sources and not under the head capital gains the ld CIT(A) while exercising

SUBHASH CHAND DHINGRA ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

234D as applicable as per provisions of the Act. Issue necessary forms i.e. Demand notice, challans etc. 30. At the same time to conclude that interest received on compensation or enhanced compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is to be treated as income from other sources and not under the head capital gains the ld CIT(A) while exercising

RAMVIR YADAV,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD- 3(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

gain (“LTCG”) in the hands of the assessee.\n3. Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld.\nCIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 07.04.2025, dismissed the\nappeal of the assessee and confirmed the action of the AO.\n4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal\nbefore the Tribunal by taking following grounds

AMAR SINGH,REWARI vs. ITO, WARD-1, REWARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the learned Assessing Authority/CIT(A) further erred by initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) & 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. Notice u/s 148 was issued by ITO, Ward-3, Rewari on 26.3.2014 after recording reasons that the assessee has sold immovable property valued at Rs.5

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B of the Act which is separate code in itself and overrides other provisions of the Act. Undisputedly, the R&D cess has actually been paid to the Government within the time limits prescribed by section 43B of the Act. He contended that section 43B of the Act allows payment of statutory dues on payment basis. Any expenses which

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B of the Act which is separate code in itself and overrides other provisions of the Act. Undisputedly, the R&D cess has actually been paid to the Government within the time limits prescribed by section 43B of the Act. He contended that section 43B of the Act allows payment of statutory dues on payment basis. Any expenses which

STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 21/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Standard Chartered Grindlays Ltd., Vs Acit(Intl. Taxation), 4, Todar Mal Lane, Bengali Market, Circle-3, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3880Q Assessee By : Ms. Shashi M. Kapila, Adv. & Sh. Pravesh Sharma, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.08.2022

capital gains of Rs.232,21,57,920/-. Allowability of business expenditure incurred outside India which pertains only to the Indian Business: 4. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenses which were incurred only for the Indian business outside India on the grounds that these are general head office & administrative expenses which fall under section 44C of the Income

WE ARE VOICES ENTERTAINMENT INC,GURGAON vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

234D of the Act. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act mechanically and without recording any adequate satisfaction for such initiation.” 3. Briefly stated, the assessee is a non-resident company incorporated under the laws

SANJAY BANSAL,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(2)(1),GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

234D was charged as per law. 4. Aggrieved by the asses sment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4.1 Regarding the disallowance of interest of Rs. 13,00,425/-, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the findings of the AO, ruling that the interest paid on a property loan is not allowable under Section

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), NEW DELHI

capital gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income.\n9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that\ninvestment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic\nbusiness activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on\ncapital account and not as “stock-in-trade”.\n9.4 That the assessing officer