JAI BHIKSHU CREDIT AND HOLDING LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishijai Bhikshu Credit & Holding Vs. Dcit, Ltd, F-591, Sarita Vihar, Circle-13(1), New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacj0774F (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains'. It is also submitted that the impugned transaction could be treated as speculative only if all the conditions laid down and the provisions under Explanation to section 73

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)

Capital gain from the sale of shares of Euro Asian Securities. Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the income shown from sale of shares of Euro Asian Securities Ltd. was, in fact, assessable as business Income of the assessee. According to the Assessing Officer the dealing in the shares of Euro Asian Securities Ltd. CIT (A) allowed the appeal

NEELU ANALJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with above directions

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishimrs. Neelu Analjit Singh, Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of 15, Dr. Apj Abdul Kalam Road, Income Tax , New Delhi Special Range-9, Pan: Aatps06882D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital asset if it is held for not more than thirty-six months. However, in the case of share of an unlisted company or a unit of a Mutual Fund specified under clause (23D) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act, which is transferred during the period beginning on 1st April, 2014 and ending on 10th July

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. VIREET INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Circle 17 (1) Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 21D, Friends Colony West, New Delhi – 110 065. (Pan : Aaacv2033M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2004-05 On 31.10.2004 Declaring Income Of Rs.34,80,69,911/-. The Same Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The 2 Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) On 28.12.2004. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. In Response, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Attended From Time To Time & Submitted Relevant Information As Called For. 3. The Assessee Was Incorporated On 03.10.1983 With The Main Objects, As Per Memorandum Of Association, To Acquire & Hold Shares, Stocks, Debentures, Debenture Stocks, Bonds, Obligations & Securities Issued Or Guaranteed By Any Company Constituted Or Carried On Business In The Republic Of India. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Make The Following Additions In The Assessment Completed U/S 143 (3) Of The Act :-

section 143 (1) of the 2 Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.12.2004. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response, ld. AR for the assessee attended from time to time and submitted relevant information as called

SUMITOMO CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Sumitomo Corporation Vs Dcit (International Taxation) G-195, Circle-3(1)(2) Sarita Vihar New Delhi New Delhi Aabcs6011P (Appellant) (Respondent)

73,211/-. This tax had been computed only for the purposes of calculation, despite the fact no tax was payable due to set-off against brought forward capital loss). Against the draft order of assessment, the assessee had filed its objections’ on 27.04.2016 u/s 144C(2) of the Act before the DRP. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

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)

73. The Assessee further submits that the liquidation of ETIL was not carried out with a view to claim the benefit of India-Mauritius DTAA, because, even in the absence of liquidation, the benefit of India-Mauritius DTAA was available to the Assessee as the Assessee had the option of selling the shares of ETIL, the gains arising whereof would

M/S STYLISH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishistylish Construction Pvt. Ltd, Dcit, 1027, Top Floor, Ward No. 8, Circle-9(1), Vs. Mehra Chowk, Mehrauli New Delhi Pan: Aaics4664H (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 73 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to the loss on shares reads as follow:- " Where any part of the business of a company (other than a company whose gross total income consists mainly of income which is chargeable under the heads "Interest on securities", "Income from house property", "Capital Gains

M/S. A K CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 6859/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 A. K. Capital Markets Ltd., Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, 609, 6Th Floor, Antriksh Bhawan, 22, New Delhi Kasturba Gandhi Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadca9960D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sarabhjit Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2015 Order

Capital gains” and “Income from other sources”. Now, ordinarily income which arises from one source which falls under the head of profits and gains of business or profession can be set off against the loss which arises from another source under the same head. Sub Section (1) of Section 73

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DIMENSION CONSULTING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and the cross objection of

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Ms. Suchitra Kamble : & Acit Circle 10(1), Vs. M/S Dimension Consulting Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. B-11/8127, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacd 3264 C C.O. 224/Del/2010 [In Ita No. 2321/Del/2010 (A.Y: 2006-07 ) & C.O. 217/Del/2012 M/S Dimension Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit Circle 10(1), B-11/8127, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi.

73,30,424/-, short term capital gains on futures at Rs. 12,47,345/-, short term capital gains on mutual funds at Rs. 5,63,033/-, long term capital gain on shares at Rs. 19,33,968/-, long term capital gains on mutual funds at Rs. 1,68,335/-. Since there were enormous transactions in sale/ purchase of shares

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DIMENSION CONSULTING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and the cross objection of

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Ms. Suchitra Kamble : & Acit Circle 10(1), Vs. M/S Dimension Consulting Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. B-11/8127, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacd 3264 C C.O. 224/Del/2010 [In Ita No. 2321/Del/2010 (A.Y: 2006-07 ) & C.O. 217/Del/2012 M/S Dimension Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit Circle 10(1), B-11/8127, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi.

73,30,424/-, short term capital gains on futures at Rs. 12,47,345/-, short term capital gains on mutual funds at Rs. 5,63,033/-, long term capital gain on shares at Rs. 19,33,968/-, long term capital gains on mutual funds at Rs. 1,68,335/-. Since there were enormous transactions in sale/ purchase of shares

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

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section, for claiming the deduction on the\ncapital gains on the sale of the land, the first requirement is that capital gain\nshould arise 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 used\nby the assessee being an individual or his parent

ANANT RAJ LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

73. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record and duly considered the factual matrix of the case. 74. The only issue remains for consideration here is, whether the long-term capital gain on sale of two properties declared by the assessee in its return of income has to be excluded from taxable income

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

73. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record and duly considered the factual matrix of the case. 74. The only issue remains for consideration here is, whether the long-term capital gain on sale of two properties declared by the assessee in its return of income has to be excluded from taxable income

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

73. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record and duly considered the factual matrix of the case. 74. The only issue remains for consideration here is, whether the long-term capital gain on sale of two properties declared by the assessee in its return of income has to be excluded from taxable income

M/S. EASTMAN INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and that of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 14A by the Assessing Officer for calculation of income which does not form part of the total income. The assessee had submitted detailed calculation before the ld. CIT(A), in which he has already disallowed a sum of Rs.1,05,329/- whereas the Assessing Officer has mentioned in his order only Rs.971/-. The ld. CIT(A) after discussing

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DATAVISION SYSTEMS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi & Acit, Vs. Datavision Systems P Ltd, Circle-10(1), 203, Pragati House, New Delhi 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaacd3381N (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143 (3) has accepted the income from capital gains and has not made any adjustment on this account. In view of this it is submitted that income shown by the assessee on sale of shares is as investor and not as a Trader and therefore required to be charged under the head capital gains only and not business income

SUNIL MALHOTRA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4743/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sunil Malhotra, Vs Acit, D-279, Defence Colony, Circle-54(1), New Delhi-110024 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaopm5378F Assessee By : Sh. N. S. Bhatnagar, Adv. Revenue By : Dr. Anjula Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.04.2020 Order Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-18, New Delhi Dated 04.07.2016. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee: “1. That The Learned Ito Erred In Law In Denying The Benefit Admissible U/S 54 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Wrongly Relying Upon Clause 2(A) Of Section 54F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which On The Facts Of The Case In Not Applicable.

73,379/- 9. The provisions of Section 54 and 54F are as under: “Section 54: [(1)] [[Subject to the provisions of sub- section (2), where, in the case of an assessee51 being an individual or a Hindu undivided family], the capital gain

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MAHESH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

sections, it is quite evident that the Act does not prescribe any provision, which specifies that the period of holding should be decisive factor for determining whether the asset in a capital asset or stock in trade. It is also pertinent to note that the Act only prescribed that if shares are held in a company for not more than