ARUN SHUNGLOO TRUST

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

ARUN SHUNGLOO TRUST

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S MANSAROVAR INVESTMENTS LTD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S NALWA INVESTMENT LTD.

Appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASI

Appeals are allowed

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S ABHUINANDAN INVESTMENTS LT

Appeals are allowed

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S MANSAROVAR INVESTMENTS LTD

Appeals are allowed

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G

ANUBHAV KAPOOR,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Capital Gain (LTCG) at Rs.1,02,91,568/- as against Rs.4,88,868/- offered by the assessee. The AO noted that this case was selected for scrutiny through CASS under ‘limited scrutiny’ to examine the following issue:- (i) Large deduction claim u/s 54B, 54C, 54D, 54G, 54GA (schedule CG of ITR) 3.1. The AO noted that during the year under

M/S. ONKARESHWAR PROPERTIES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

54G and 54H, be chargeable to income-tax under 'the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. " 24. As per the above provision, gain arising from transfet of a capital asset is to be taxed under the head capital gain. Further section

KUSUM SAHGAL,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-19(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Kusum Sahgal, Through Lr Shri Vs. Acit, Circle-19(2), Viney Sagar Sahgal, New Delhi Mg-2002, The Magnolias, Golf Course Road Dlf Phase-V, Gurugram, 122 002 Haryana Pan :Aatps3766J (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains (Schedule CG of ITR); (ii) Large deduction claimed u/s 54B,54C,54D,54G, 54GA (Schedule CG of ITR) and (iii) Large balance in foreign bank account (Schedule FA of ITR). Notice under Section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT EXPORT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2008-09 Ay: 2009-10 Acit, Vs Bharat Export, Circle 20(1), 293. Dhakka Johar, Room No. F-308, Dr. Mukharjee Nagar, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi.-110009 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaafb6979M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S.L. Anuragi Dr Respondent By: Shri C.S. Anand, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 18.02.2016 Date Of Pronouncement:

54G of the Act was concerned, the assessee did not raise this issue before the Ld. First Appellate Authority at all. However, the quantum of Long Term Capital Gains and Short Term Capital Gain was I.T.A. Nos. 4747 & 4746/D/2012 Assessment Years 2008-09, 09-10 recomputed by the Ld. CIT (A). LTCG was enhanced

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT EXPORT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2008-09 Ay: 2009-10 Acit, Vs Bharat Export, Circle 20(1), 293. Dhakka Johar, Room No. F-308, Dr. Mukharjee Nagar, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi.-110009 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaafb6979M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S.L. Anuragi Dr Respondent By: Shri C.S. Anand, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 18.02.2016 Date Of Pronouncement:

54G of the Act was concerned, the assessee did not raise this issue before the Ld. First Appellate Authority at all. However, the quantum of Long Term Capital Gains and Short Term Capital Gain was I.T.A. Nos. 4747 & 4746/D/2012 Assessment Years 2008-09, 09-10 recomputed by the Ld. CIT (A). LTCG was enhanced

KAMLESH KHANNA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-40(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

capital gains and income from other sources. The assessee e-filed his return of income for the A.Y under consideration declaring income of Rs. 24,51,630/- on 30.03.2016 which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, this case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to examine (i) Large investment in property as compared to total income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ONKARESHWAR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

54G and 54H, be chargeable to income-tax under 'the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. " 24. As per the above provision, gain arising from transfet of a capital asset is to be taxed under the head capital gain. Further section

M/S. MACHINTORG (INDIA) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

capital gain from sale of factory in the course of shifting factory from one place to other. Section 54G of the IT Act provides

YORK TECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-25(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

capital gain and I.T.A. No.635/DEL/2021 32 claimed exemption under section 54G. Chapter XXII-B of the Income Tax Act, prior

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMINATHAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

capital gains scheme. 3. Because without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by disallowing the expenses to the tune of Rs. 2,83,473/- incurred in lieu of purchase of the new residential unit, more so, when all evidence were duly submitted before the Authorities below. 3.1.Because the registration expenses were much

MUKESH GARG,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT - 16, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed considering the above two aspects and keeping the other aspects open

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Gunjan Garg, Vs. Pr. Cit-16, C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates Ca, Room No. 101, Drum Shape L-7A(Lgf) South Exten. Part-Ii, New Building, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aagpg5718B (Appellant) (Respondent) Mukesh Garg, Vs. Pr. Cit-16, C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates Ca, Room No. 101, Drum Shape L-7A(Lgf) South Exten. Part-Ii, New Building, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaapg2585Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

sections, only the Hon’ble ITSC was having the jurisdiction, hence the order passed u/s.263 bv POT is outside the scope and powers of Ld. POT. 3. That the order passed u/s.263 is unsustainable in law so much so that SCN has been issued for different issue and the findings and directions are given on different 4. That