CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

capital gains and income from other sources, the total is arrived at and it is from this total that the losses of the current year and the brought forward losses from the past years are to be set off. The resultant figure gives the gross total income of the assessee from which deductions under Chapter VIA are to be made

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

capital gains and income from other sources, the total is arrived at and it is from this total that the losses of the current year and the brought forward losses from the past years are to be set off. The resultant figure gives the gross total income of the assessee from which deductions under Chapter VIA are to be made

SMT. VINAY MEHTA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

section 54 of the Act, learned CIT (A) has given factually incorrect findings and also findings contrary to material available on record and thus, the said addition needs to be deleted, as such. 1.3 That further, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the denial of full benefit of indexation

DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. SH. RAMESH BATTA, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Cross

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle, Ramesh Batta, Dehradun. Vs. 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun.

capital gains- 10,58,921/- Income from other sources 10,326/- Gross total income 1,86,95,313/- Less Deduction u/s 80C 1,00,000/- 1,85,95,313/- Rounded off as per section

VIJAY GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Vijay Gupta, Vs Ito, H.No.538, Pipe Line Road, Ward-34(1), Khasra No.154, Chhoti Pooth Civic Centre, Jln (Pooth Khurd), Bawana, Marg, New Delhi. Delhi-110039. Pan-Ajdpg6741Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2022

80C & 80D of the Act upon the production of the supporting evidences. 5. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has preferred present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is against the sustaining of addition of Rs.93,50,014/- on account of alleged STCG. 7. Ld.Sr.DR supported the orders of the authorities below

BHAWANI SHANKER GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 24(3), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2008-09 Bhawani Shanker Gupta, Vs Ito, 18, Asola Village, Fatehpur Beri, Ward-24(3), Near Mcd Hospital, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aanpg5347D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2021 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.11.2013 Of The Cit(A)-11, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Of Retail Trading Of Building Material. He Filed His Return Of Income On 31St July, 2008 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.1,07,216/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass. In This Case Air Information Was Also Received For Deposit Of Cash Above Rs.10 Lakhs.

section 44AF (5% of Rs.7,08.320/-) 35,416/- Income from Capital Gain Short Term capital gain (as per enclosed sheet) 66,664/- Income from Other Sources 3 REC Bonds Interest 11000 Bank Interest 415 11415 Total Income 1,13,495 Less : Deduction u/s 80C

DABUR INDIA LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: We Consider The Submissions Made In Support Of The Appeal The Following Facts Require To Be Noted:- 2.1 The Assessee Is In The Business Of Manufacturing Herbal Products & Cosmetics. On 30.11.2000 Assessee Filed Its Return For Assessment Year 2000-01 Wherein, It Declared An Income Of Rs 12,15,25,093/-. On 10.5.2001 The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1)(A) Of The Act As The Returned Income. However, Notices Were Issued Under Section 143(2) Of The Act. 2.2 In Response To The Aforesaid Notices, Hearing Was Attended By An Authorized Representative Before The Assessing Officer. 2008:Dhc:2521

capital expenditure or a personal expense of the assessee but being otherwise laid out or expended fully and exclusively for the purposes of business or profession is allowed to be deducted in computing income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession.” The other provisions mentioned in Chapter IV and provisions of Chapter V not being relevant

SMT. NEELAM HANDA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishineelam Handa, Ito, C-7/7, Ground Floor, Ward-20(4), Vs. Model Town-Iii, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Abgph5388D (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain would arise from the sale of his house. Their Lordships of the Kerala High Court have examined the issue and have held that the wording of section itself would make it clear that law does not insist that sale consideration obtained by the assessee itself should be utilised for the purchase of house property. The main part

GREAT EASTERN EXPORTS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

80C to 80U. (2) The aggregate amount of the deductions under this Chapter shall not, in any case, exceed the gross total income of the assessee. (3) Where, in computing the total income of an association of persons or a body of individuals, any deduction is admissible under section 80G or [section 80GGA or section 80GGC] or section 80HH

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

capital gains” and “income from other sources”. Then comes Section 14A, which we will be examining later on. Chapter IV consists of Sections 14 to 59 and deals with computation/quantification under separate heads of income mentioned in Section 14. Chapter V of the Act deals with income of other persons, which are to be included in the assessee‟s total

CIT vs. KRIBHCO

capital gains” and “income from other sources”. Then comes Section 14A, which we will be examining later on. Chapter IV consists of Sections 14 to 59 and deals with computation/quantification under separate heads of income mentioned in Section 14. Chapter V of the Act deals with income of other persons, which are to be included in the assessee‟s total

PRAMOD KUMAR SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10

capital gains from the alleged property • The appellant has filed copies of wealth tax record of Sh. Rajnath Seth HUF for assessment year 1978-79, 79-80, 80-81, 81-82, 82-83. These wealth tax returns have been signed by Sh. A.K Seth, though the returns are in the name of Sh. Rajnath Seth (HUF). It is important that

AJAY KUMAR SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10

capital gains from the alleged property • The appellant has filed copies of wealth tax record of Sh. Rajnath Seth HUF for assessment year 1978-79, 79-80, 80-81, 81-82, 82-83. These wealth tax returns have been signed by Sh. A.K Seth, though the returns are in the name of Sh. Rajnath Seth (HUF). It is important that

M/S R SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2011-12]

80C to 80U. Section 80B(5) defines for the purposes of Chapter VIA "gross total income" to mean the total income computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, before making any deduction under the Chapter. What the Revenue in essence seeks to attain is to telescope the provisions of Chapter VI-A in the context of the deduction

MEENA GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

section 153C r.w.s 144 of the Act at a total income of Rs.1,45,44,630/-. A search and seizure action was carried out on the Rama and Param Group and other related cases on 28.02.2014 at various residential and business premises. Certain incriminating documents relating to the assessee were found during the said search which pertain to the impugned

MS. UMA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Uma Gupta, Vs. Acit, Aerens Bimaldeep Complex, Central Circle-9, Behind Pocket-3, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aahpg0455E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajeshwar Painuly, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.10.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex Parte Order Dated 23Rd March, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-25, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That A Search & Seizure & Survey Operation U/S 132/133A Of The It Act, 1961 Were Conducted On 17Th August, 2011 In The Case Of The Assessee Along With Other Cases Of The Group At Various Residential & Business Premises. In Response To Notice U/S 153A, The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income Declaring Income From House Property At Rs.1,26,000/-, Income From Bank Interest At Rs.241/- & Income From Dividend At Rs.53,050/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Observed That The Assessee Has Declared Capital Loss On Sale Of Property At Rs.32,536/- Giving Note That The Indexed Cost Of The Property Is More By An Amount Of Rs.32,536/- Than The Sale Consideration Of The Land. However, In The Balance Sheet, The Assessee Has Credited A Sum Of Rs.80,032.67 As Profit On Sale Of Land. In Absence Of Any Proper Explanation From The Side Of The Assessee, The Ao Treated The Long-Term Capital Gain At Rs.80,032.67 & Determined The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.1,71,997/-, After Allowing Deduction U/S 80C At Rs.34,276/- & Allowing The Exemption U/S 10(34) Of The Act On Dividend Income At Rs.53,050/-.

80C at Rs.34,276/- and allowing the exemption u/s 10(34) of the Act on dividend income at Rs.53,050/-. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A), in the ex parte order, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Although he has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, however, he has decided

BHIM SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

80C &Rs 18,172/- claimed U/s 80Dof the Act. The action of the ld.AO is totally unlawful, unjustified and unreasonable. The deduction claimed deserves to be allowed. 2. On the basis of Facts &circumstances of the case there is no legal warrant or valid justification on the part of learned AO to make addition

NAUNIHAL SINGH SAHNI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 49(3), NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

80C of the Act claimed by the Assessee. 5. That the Id. Assessing Officer has erred in ignoring the facts that the Assessee has incurred huge amount on cost of improvement in property sold. 6. That the proper and meaningful opportunity was not provided to the Assessee while framing the assessment u/s 144/147 of the Act. Thus the order framed

NAND KISHORE GUPTA,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD 2(3), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C.

section 50(2) of the Act. 3.4 Otherwise also, the lower Authorities erred in assessing Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 19,61,197/- as Short Term Capital Gain and demanding Income Tax at ordinary slab against 20% Rate prescribed u/s 112 of the Act. 3.5 That the lower Authorities erred in not giving claim of deduction u/s 80C