DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, DELHI vs. SANJEEV AGRAWAL HUF, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

69D though he has stated to apply tax rate as per section 115BBE. 7.2.4 In this case also appellant has sold of 3,63,045 shares of NU's Capital Trade Links Lad for Rs. 1.28.81,091/ on which appellant earned long term capital gain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI vs. DEEPTI AGRAWAL, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. M. Balaganeshdcit Vs. Deepti Agrawal Central Circle – 15 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi-110 054 Pan No. Aampa 0573 C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 48/Del/2024 (In Ita No.224/Del/2024) (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Deepti Agrawal Vs. Dcit 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane, Central Circle – 15 Civil Lines, New Delhi New Delhi-110 054 Pan No. Aampa 0573 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

69D though he has stated to apply tax rate as per section 115BBE. 8.6.4. If the inference is drawn that ld. AO has made a disallowance of claim of exemption by the assessee u/s 10(38), then, first and foremost, his statement of applying the rate of 60% under section 115BBE does ITA No. 224 /Del/2024 CO No.48/Del/2024 Deepti Agarwal

PRATEEK GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. PR, CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 Prateek Gupta, Vs. Pr. Cit 152, Chanderpuri, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201001 Pan Atbpg8602J (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain or penny stocks for converting their unaccounted money. The investigation revealed that the share prices of these penny stock companies were manipulated by syndicate of operators. As per the details available on the website of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’), it conducted an investigation into the trading activities in the scrip

J. M. HOUSING LIMITED,DELHI vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL) KNP MEERUT, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22] J.M. Housing Limited, Pr.Cit (Central) Kanpur, At Meerut, 312/3T/F5 Pratap Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Bhainsali Ground, Bhahadur Shah Zafar Marg, Vs Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-25001 Central Delhi, Delhi-11002 Pan-Aaccj1692E Assessee Revenue

gains of the business or profession, and accordingly chargeable to income-tax as the income of that previous year. Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of any such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof" shall include the remission or cessation of any liability

HARISH NARANG,PANIPAT vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Harish Narang, The Principal Commissioner Of H. No.238, Ward No.8, Income Tax, Rohtak, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Mansarover Park, Rohtak, Haryana-124001 Pan:Acvpn4090J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Amit Kaushik, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.12.2025

69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a) the income tax payable shall be the aggregate of – (i) the amount of income tax calculated on the income referred to in clause (a) and clause (b), at the rate of sixty percent; and (ii) the amount of income tax with which the assessee would been chargeable had his total

MAHESH CHAND SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-35(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

capital gain and the entire addition has been made only on the basis of surrender made by the assessee at the time of search. 12. On identical set of facts, the coordinate bench in ITA No. 1344/DEL/2021 had the occasion to adjudicate similar issue. The relevant findings read as under: “9. Having held so, we may further add that

DR. PRIYA NARULA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD INT. TAX 2(2)(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

69D under which the addition is to be made. Further, Ld. CIT-A erred in law and failed to appreciate that on the said facts of the Case, provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act could not be invoked and accordingly the Assessment Orders U/s 143(3) dated 24.12.2019 ("assessment orders) are arbitrary in nature and against the natural principles

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD vs. PRAHLAD, PALWAL

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

capital expenditure of Rs.5,05,460/- is being granted to the assessee @ 5% as the car was purchased in the month of February, 2020. With respect to non-GST purchases of Rs. 3,70,29,969/- for purchasing items like sand, mud, stone, crush, small stones etc., the assessee has submitted copies of bank statements reflecting payments, sample invoices

DEEPAK AGARWAL,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, DELHI

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

capital gain and non disclosure of source of investment , the AO has no authority available in law to pass order holding that the income had escaped assessment following as “adventure in nature of trade”. 8.1 Similarly Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ATS Infrastructure Ltd vs ACIT 473 ITR 595 and Banyan Real Estate Fund Mauritius vs ACIT

DEEPAK AGARWAL,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25 , DELHI

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

capital gain and non disclosure of source of investment , the AO has no authority available in law to pass order holding that the income had escaped assessment following as “adventure in nature of trade”. 8.1 Similarly Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ATS Infrastructure Ltd vs ACIT 473 ITR 595 and Banyan Real Estate Fund Mauritius vs ACIT

DEEPAK AGARWAL,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, DELHI

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

capital gain and non disclosure of source of investment , the AO has no authority available in law to pass order holding that the income had escaped assessment following as “adventure in nature of trade”. 8.1 Similarly Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ATS Infrastructure Ltd vs ACIT 473 ITR 595 and Banyan Real Estate Fund Mauritius vs ACIT

DEEPAK AGARWAL,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE- 13, DELHI

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

capital gain and non disclosure of source of investment , the AO has no authority available in law to pass order holding that the income had escaped assessment following as “adventure in nature of trade”. 8.1 Similarly Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ATS Infrastructure Ltd vs ACIT 473 ITR 595 and Banyan Real Estate Fund Mauritius vs ACIT