DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NARMIL INFOSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vs. Narmil Infosolutions Pvt. Circle-17(2), Ltd, New Delhi C/O Aar & Associates, Ca 701-702, Rg Trade Tower, Netaji Subash Place, Pitampur, New Delhi Pan : Aabcn9307R (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain is liable to tax in India. On this issue, the ld. CIT (Appeals) held that such finding of the Assessing Officer is not supported by the Indian Income Tax Act as well as the DTAA. Assessee also contested before him that provisions of section 163 (1) of the act provides that before the person is treated

SH. BIKRAM SINGH,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-3522/Del/2013 (Assessment Year-2009-10) Bikram Singh Vs Dcit 8/34, Mehram Nagar Circle 15 (1), New Delhi New Delhi Abkps5232P (Respondent) (Appellant)

capital gain by the A.O or was considered by A.O in the order of assessment, the same was not the subject matter of appeal and was thus outside the scope of the provision of Section 246A

SURENDER KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-39(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Surender Kumar, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2941L (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains arising from sale of shares of M/s Cressanda Solutions Limited of Rs 21,67,619/-. During assessment proceedings assessee has filed documents supporting exemption u/s 10(38) namely bank statements , broker notes, etc. Purchase and sale took place through doubtless banking channel. Notably no books of accounts were there before AO and Ld CIT(A) during assessment

SANJAY KAUL

gain (‘LTCG’) of Rs.4,15,67,925/- on sale of shares in unlisted companies. The appellant further incurred short-term capital loss (‘STCL’) of Rs. 1,57,23,872/- out of which a sum of Rs.1,22,76,352/- related to purchase and sale of the shares of following three listed companies: S.No. Description STCL (Rs.) 1. Cressanda Solutions

SANJAY KAUL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

gain (‘LTCG’) of Rs.4,15,67,925/- on sale of shares in unlisted companies. The appellant further incurred short-term capital loss (‘STCL’) of Rs. 1,57,23,872/- out of which a sum of Rs.1,22,76,352/- related to purchase and sale of the shares of following three listed companies: S.No. Description STCL (Rs.) 1. Cressanda Solutions

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 NEW DELHI vs. M/S HESPERA REALTY PVT. LTD.

gains were excluded from the calculations of the book profits under Section 115JB of the Act. The CIT(A) found no merit in the aforesaid contention. The learned ITAT had found no fault with the decision of the CIT(A) and rejected the Revenue’s appeal. QUESTION OF LAW 4. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue has preferred the present

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

capital gains would be chargeable in some cases where the cost of acquisition was Niland hence, it is the statute which empowers the authorities to levy fees, charges or taxes. In the absence of such power, there is no merit in levy of fees under section 234E of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and perused

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

capital gains would be chargeable in some cases where the cost of acquisition was Niland hence, it is the statute which empowers the authorities to levy fees, charges or taxes. In the absence of such power, there is no merit in levy of fees under section 234E of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and perused

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

capital gains would be chargeable in some cases where the cost of acquisition was Niland hence, it is the statute which empowers the authorities to levy fees, charges or taxes. In the absence of such power, there is no merit in levy of fees under section 234E of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and perused

M/S. SAMIKARAN LEARNING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

capital gains would be chargeable in some cases where the cost of acquisition was Nil and hence, it is the statute which empowers the authorities to levy fees, charges or taxes. In the absence of such power, there is no merit in levy of fees under section 234E of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and perused

M/S. SAMIKARAN LEARNING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

capital gains would be chargeable in some cases where the cost of acquisition was Nil and hence, it is the statute which empowers the authorities to levy fees, charges or taxes. In the absence of such power, there is no merit in levy of fees under section 234E of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and perused

SMT. GEETA RANI YADAV,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishigeeta Rani Yadav, Vs. Ito, Sector-62, Shastri Nagar, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Aaxpy3625N (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain was worked out at Rs. 5 6.37 Lacs considering the deemed sale consideration of Rs. 7 9.85 Lacs and granting the indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 1 5.32 lakhs and cost of improvement of Rs. 8.15 Lacs. Consequently the assessment order under section 143 (3) was passed on 20/12/2011 and penalty proceedings under section

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

DUGGAL & SONS BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

DUGGAL & SONS BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

ARUN DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

SANJAY DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

SANJAY DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed