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)

capital gains, the sine qua non is that the receipt or accrual must have originated in a 'transfer' within the meaning of section 45, read with section 2(47), of the Act. Since there could not be any transfer in the instant case, it has to be held that the amount of Rs. 1

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Section 45(1) 'capital gains' are any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Section 45(1) 'capital gains' are any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous

SAT SAHIB SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Sat Sahib Securities Pvt. Vs Dcit Ltd. Pvt. Ltd., B-129, Anand Circle – 7 (1) Vihar, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi Pan No.Aabcs2456G (Appellant) (Respondent)

1,09,41,612/- and short term capital gain of Rs 67,87654/-. Apart from that, the assessee has also shown income from dividend which has been claimed as exempt income. 4. The assessee has filed return of income, declaring at Rs.72,16,819/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and assessment under section

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

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

45 and section 48 provides for computation of capital gain, which is arrived at after deducting cost of acquisition i.e. cost of any improvement and expenditure incurred in connection with transfer of capital asset, even for arriving of gain in transfer of equity shares; lastly, sections 70 & 71 elaborates the mechanism for set off of capital gain. Nowhere, any exception

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

45 and section 48 provides for computation of capital gain, which is arrived at after deducting cost of acquisition i.e. cost of any improvement and expenditure incurred in connection with transfer of capital asset, even for arriving of gain in transfer of equity shares; lastly, sections 70 & 71 elaborates the mechanism for set off of capital gain. Nowhere, any exception

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)

capital gains on the shares which were acquired in 2008 and sold in 2011, which is much before 1 April 2017, is unsustainable and bad in law. V. The Assessee is not a resident of India as its control & management is not situated wholly in India: a. Residential status of an assessee is required to be determined every year

ARUN SHUNGLOO TRUST

Section 45:(1) Any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year

ITO,WARD-30(1), NEW DELHI vs. VINOD GUGNANI, NEW DELHI

In the result, grounds of Appeal of the Revenue fails, consequently the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

capital gain arising from the transfer of the original asset not charged under section 45 on the basis of the cost of such new asset as provided in clause (a), or, as the case may be, clause (b), of sub- section (1

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), DELHI vs. HKT CORPORATION PVT LTD, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\nITA No.1036/Del/2024\nAssessment Year: 2020-21\n\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-11(1),\nDelhi\nVs.\nM/s. HKT Corporation Pvt.\nLtd.,\n7, South Patel Nagar,\nNew Delhi\nPAN: AACCH0308M\n\n(Appellant)\n\n(Respondent)\n\nAssessee by\nSh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv.\n\nDepartment by\nSh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR\n\nDate of hearing\n23.06.2025\n\nDate of pronouncement\n09.07.2025\n\nORDER\n\nPER SATBEER SINGH

1. That the Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department has\ngrossly erred both in law and on facts in making an\nassessment under section 143(3) r.w 1448 of the Act at an\nincome of Rs.6,11,19,987/-and short-term capital loss of (-\n) Rs.1,45,74,040/- as against returned income filed

ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital\ngains arising on the sale of Lucknow property shall inter alia be effected\nin the previous year save as otherwise provided in sections 54 of the Act.\nSub-section (1) of section 45 of the Act during the relevant period is\nreproduced as under:-\nCapital gains

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 vs. REEMA CHAWLA

Appeals are dismissed

capital gain, shall not be charged under section 45: Provided that the investment made on or after the 1st day of April, 2007, in the long-term specified asset by an assessee during any financial year does not exceed fifty lakh rupees." On a plain reading of the above said provision, we are of the view that section 54EC(1

DCIT, CIRCLE 52(1), NEW DELHI vs. BHUPINDER SINGH BHALLA, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

1) Subject to the provisions of Sub-section (2), where the capital gain\narises from the transfer of a capital asset being land which, in the two years\nimmediately preceding the date on which the transfer took place, was being\nused by the assessee or a parent of his for agricultural purposes\n(hereinafter referred to as the original asset

AJAY GULIYA

gains arising from transfer of a capital asset shall be deemed to be the income of a previous year in which the transfer takes place. Therefore, the words “received” or “accruing” in section 48 shall have to be read in conjunction with the provision contained in section 45(1

DCIT, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. SAHIL VACHANI, DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdient (), Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shriavdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2604/िद"ी/2023(िन.व. 2016-17)

45,59,592/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The First Appellate Authority vide impugned order deleted the penalty. Hence, the present appeal by the Revenue. 6. We find that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details in the return of income including Long Term Capital Gains

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

45,60 22,70,96 19,21,58 loss 9 1 1 5 2 0 Percentag 98.34% 0.70% 0.16% 017% 0.18% 0.15% e of Capital gain to Total capital gain *inclusive of shares of Dabur India Ltd., Punjab Tractors Ltd. and ABN Amro Securities Pvt. Ltd. Total Capital Rs. Long Term Capital Gain claimed exempt u/s. 10(38) 1

ACIT, CIRCLE-24(1), NEW DELHI vs. SPRING INFRADEV LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year:2016-17]

section 47(iv) of the Income Tax Act. 4. The assessee inadvertently declared the Long-term capital gain of Rs. 12,97,20,752/- on sale of capital asset held by it to its 100% Indian subsidiary company chargeable to tax u/s 45 of the Act in the return of income filed by the assessee