ESSAR COM LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(2), NEW DELHI

TDS deducted by EPSL was kept in\nabeyance on account of AAR proceedings in the second round. In\nthis return it was claimed that the capital gains

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income. 9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic business activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on capital account and not as “stock-in-trade”. 9.4 That the assessing officer erred

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income. 9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic business activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on capital account and not as “stock-in-trade”. 9.4 That the assessing officer erred

BHUPINDER SINGH JULKA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-INT. TAX. 2(1)(2), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS u/s 194A 2,48,603 =22,37,431 Net Compensation credit. 3.3 It is submitted that the aforesaid compensation is duly treated as capital receipt and considered as part of sale consideration for the purpose of computing capital gain

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

Capital Gains on sale of property at Rs.3.9 crores\non 12.03.2020. The invoices and bank details of payments\nand TDS

M/S MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

capital gain of Rs.6,90,68,982/- as business income.\n9.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that\ninvestment in units of mutual funds and shares were made as a systematic\nbusiness activity, without appreciating that such investments were made on\ncapital account and not as “stock-in-trade”.\n9.4 That the assessing officer

SANGITA KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE INT.TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

capital gain of Rs. 12,30,01,903/-. The assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 30.07.2016 declaring a total income of Rs. 12,53,57,250/- and claimed TDS

HERSH VARDHAN KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

capital gain of Rs. 12,30,01,903/-. The assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 30.07.2016 declaring a total income of Rs. 12,53,57,250/- and claimed TDS

NINA KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT.TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

capital gain of Rs. 12,30,01,903/-. The assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 30.07.2016 declaring a total income of Rs. 12,53,57,250/- and claimed TDS

MUKUL ROHATGI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

capital gain was offered to tax in assessment year 2019-20, which is verified from the computation of income filed along with return of income for the assessment year 2019-20. Hence, there is no question of declaration of ALV in the relevant assessment year. 10. Coming to the next Apartment No.20, Hirst Court, London, the ALV of the same

HAREON SOLAR SINGAPORE PRIVATE LIMITED,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT INT. TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

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

TDS was duly deducted on the sale transaction as\nwell on interest on CCD. It was submitted that ld. DRP erred in observing that\nthe assessee has not made any other investment. A prayer was made by ld.\nCounsel for the assessee to grant benefit to the assessee under DTAA between\nIndia and Singapore by holding that capital gains

ANIL BHARDWAJ,ZAMBIA vs. DCIT-ACIT-INT-TAX GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1250/Del/2024 (A.Y 2020-21) Anil Bhardwaj Dcit/Acit 5994, Benakale Road, P. O Vs. International Tax, Box No. 31776, Northmead, Office Of Acit-Dcit Int- Near Rhodes Park School, Tax, Gurgaon Lusaka-10101, Zambia, Ny (Respondent) Pan No. Anlpb2321F (Appellant)

Capital Gain (‘STCG’ for short) and making disallowances of the exemption available u/s 54F of the Act by the Revenue Authorities is totally unwarranted and the same has been done without considering valuation report of Government approved valuer and contrary to the CBDT Circular on jewellery. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the said disallowance has been made without referring

RAJNI KUMAR WIFE OF SHRI BRIG. NARENDER KUMAR H.NO.394, SECTOR-21, GURGAONN,GURGAON vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), GURGAON, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarrajni Kumar, Vs. Ito, Ward 3 (1), W/O Shri Brig. Narender Kumar, Gurgaon. House No.394, Sector 21, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Ayypk1781A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Sr Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 Date Of Order : 17.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 27.09.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 & The Assessment Order Was Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’).

capital gain of Rs.92,57,020/- was declared in the return of income. The assessee claimed deduction arising out of abovesaid transaction by making an investment in immovable 3 property of Rs.1,22,57,020/- u/s 54 of the Act on account of advance made for purchase of residential plot in M/s. Chintel’s International City (in short ‘M/s. Chintel

HERO MOTOCORP LTD (AS SUCCESSOR OF HERO INVESTMENT P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12

capital gains tax while buying 26% stake from Honda. It was categorically mentioned by the CBDT that the entire tax was deducted and paid at the highest rate by the Hero Group who did not seek any tax concession. 20.2 Ld. Sr. Counsel has submitted that the factum of FIPB approval for foreign direct investment was also in public domain

YOGESH PATEL,USA vs. DCIT CIRCLE INT TAXATION 2(2)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with consequences to follow as directed above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21 Yogesh Patel, Vs Dcit, 37319, Fowler Street New Ark Circle Int. Taxation 2(2)(2), California, New Delhi. Usa 94560. Pan: Arppp4747H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 23.06.2023 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Dcit, Circle International Taxation 2(2)(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao), For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Applicant Is Non-Resident Indian Settled In Usa & Is Us Tax Resident. During The Previous Year Relevant To The Assessment Year Under Reference, The Applicant Sold Ancestral Land Bearing S No14 Hissa, No 7 Pt, Village Goregaon, Tal Borivli, Mumbai Suburban Dist On December 11, 2019 & Disclosed Long Term Capital Gains Computed As Under:- Amt In Rs Sale Consideration - 18,56,87,500 Less: Deduction U/S 48 - 13,56,87,500 Net Sale Consideration (I) 5,00,00,000 Acquisition Cost Fair Market Value On 01-04-2001 Rs 10,400/- X 3647.80 Sq M 3,79,37,120 Less: 60% Reduction In Fmv Due To Encroachment 2,27,62,272 1,51,74,848 Indexed Cost 1,51,74,848 X [289/100] 4,38,55,311 Cost Of Acquisition (Ii) 4,38,55,311 Long Term Capital Gains: (I) - (Ii) 61,44,689

capital gain of Rs 13,56,87,500/- in respect of property sold during the year by Overlooking the fact that a. The AO did not issue notice u/s. 133(6) or summon u/s. 131 to the confirming parties and the occupant or to the buyer b. The AO wrongly refused to consider additional evidence submitted to the DRP during

RAHUL MITTAL,DELHI vs. PR, CIT-10, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

capital gain of Rs. 7.26 lakhs wherein the price of shares jumped by more than 600% [approx.] in a short span of period of nine months. 7. We find that the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 05.09.2017 was issued and served upon the assessee to which, on 22.09.2017, the assessee filed a detailed reply submitting copy

KANWAR SINGH TANWAR,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 19(1), DELHI, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

gains and sale deeds. on 15-122022, filed details of expenditure on\nconstruction activity, statement on cost of construction, explanatory note on\nagricultural land. SCN was issued issuedand in response the assessee filed\nwritten submission on 19-12-2022, submitted written reply on claim of\ndeduction / exemption u/s. 54F.\niv. The Ld AO during the course of assessment proceedings sent

SUPERB MIND HOLDINGS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.1832/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2020-21) M/S. Superb Mind Holdings Ltd., C/O Anita & Gadia, Chartered Accountant, F-45, Bhagat Singh Market, New Delhi 110001 Pan Aazcs-2945-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle International Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi

capital gains on sale of shares under section 112 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Shri Salil Aggarwal appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee is registered in Mauritius and is holding tax residency certificate of Mauritius. The assessee is engaged in the business of making investments. The assessee