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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32,40,59,103 1,05,24,249 market Jointly held by Dr. Pronnoy Roy & Dr. Radhika Roy Date Particulars Whether No. of shares Cost of Cost Total LTCG/ (LTCL) Cumulative through acquisition per consideration Balance Stock share received Exchange or off market 26/12/07 Purchase d in Stock 48,35,850 2,07,95,93,242 430 48,35.850 open

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

32,39,427 (Except Dabur India Ltd.) Long Term Capital Gain Rs.10,13,29,232 (without indexation) Long Term Capital Gain Rs. 2,93,99,990 (with indexation after removing Indexation) Short Term Capital Gain Rs. 1,85,41,338 Short Term Capital Gain With PMS (Net) Rs. 16,86,882 Total Rs. 15,41,96,869/- The assessee company

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

32,39,427 (Except Dabur India Ltd.) Long Term Capital Gain Rs.10,13,29,232 (without indexation) Long Term Capital Gain Rs. 2,93,99,990 (with indexation after removing Indexation) Short Term Capital Gain Rs. 1,85,41,338 Short Term Capital Gain With PMS (Net) Rs. 16,86,882 Total Rs. 15,41,96,869/- The assessee company

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

32,39,427 (Except Dabur India Ltd.) Long Term Capital Gain Rs.10,13,29,232 (without indexation) Long Term Capital Gain Rs. 2,93,99,990 (with indexation after removing Indexation) Short Term Capital Gain Rs. 1,85,41,338 Short Term Capital Gain With PMS (Net) Rs. 16,86,882 Total Rs. 15,41,96,869/- The assessee company

M/S. AT & T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

gainfully refer the provision of section 36(1) (iii) in this regard. The said section read as under:- ―(iii) the amount of the interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purposes of the business or profession: Provided that any amount of the interest paid, in respect of capital borrowed for acquisition of an asset for extension of existing

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VALMIK THAPAR, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

gain bonds on 24/2/2009 and 9/12/2009 respectively have been made out of advance receipts. Therefore, he held that learned assessing officer is not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction of Rs 1 crore u/s 54EC. Therefore, he deleted the above disallowance. Issue in Appeal 29. Therefore, AO is in appeal against the deletion of disallowance u/s 54EC and assessee

SHRI VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

gain bonds on 24/2/2009 and 9/12/2009 respectively have been made out of advance receipts. Therefore, he held that learned assessing officer is not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction of Rs 1 crore u/s 54EC. Therefore, he deleted the above disallowance. Issue in Appeal 29. Therefore, AO is in appeal against the deletion of disallowance u/s 54EC and assessee

SH. VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

gain bonds on 24/2/2009 and 9/12/2009 respectively have been made out of advance receipts. Therefore, he held that learned assessing officer is not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction of Rs 1 crore u/s 54EC. Therefore, he deleted the above disallowance. Issue in Appeal 29. Therefore, AO is in appeal against the deletion of disallowance u/s 54EC and assessee

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

iii) the actual cost of any asset falling within the block of assets acquired during the previous year, such excess shall be deemed to be the capital gains arising from the transfer of short-term capital assets ; (2) where any block of assets ceases to exist as such, for the reason that all the assets in that block are transferred

CIT vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

The appeals are disposed of

iii) the actual cost of any asset falling within the block of assets acquired during the previous year, such excess shall be deemed to be the capital gains arising from the transfer of short-term capital assets ; (2) where any block of assets ceases to exist as such, for the reason that all the assets in that block are transferred

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

The appeals are disposed of

iii) the actual cost of any asset falling within the block of assets acquired during the previous year, such excess shall be deemed to be the capital gains arising from the transfer of short-term capital assets ; (2) where any block of assets ceases to exist as such, for the reason that all the assets in that block are transferred

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

The appeals are disposed of

iii) the actual cost of any asset falling within the block of assets acquired during the previous year, such excess shall be deemed to be the capital gains arising from the transfer of short-term capital assets ; (2) where any block of assets ceases to exist as such, for the reason that all the assets in that block are transferred

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)

32. The Assessee submits that under section 6(3)(ii) of the Act (as applicable for the year under consideration), a company which is not incorporated in India is considered to be a resident of India only if, during the previous year, the control and management of its affairs is wholly situated in India. The relevant portion of the section