CIT vs. KHOOBSURAT RESORTS PVT LTD

depreciation of Rs.3,15,666/-. The assessment was taken up under Section 143 (3) by the A.O. The assessee had purchased during the period in consideration six properties. The declared value of the property at Gram Mangupura, Moradabad was Rs.20,00,000/- whereas stamp duty on a value of Rs.20,34,000/- was paid for that acquisition. Similarly for other

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI vs. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

ARIVENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

M/S. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on goodwill. 61. The Ld.AR for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised vide present grounds of appeal is similar to the issue raised vide Ground of appeal Nos. 5 to 5.3 of appeal in Assessment Year 2010-11. 62. We have already adjudicated the issue in paras above, while deciding the appeal for Assessment

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S R. INFOSYSTEMS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit Vs R. Infosystems Pvt. Ltd., Circle-3, Room No. 332, B-319, Okhla Industrial Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccr8053M Appellant Respondent

Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee on statistical purpose. 5. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the order of the CIT(A) is not just

LORDS FINCAP LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 15(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

depreciated value of structure is fully unfair and unjust under the fact and circumstances of the case, when it was not an issue in the assessment order passed by the learned ACIT. Under the income tax Act your honor has been empowered to examine on the merits and facts of the case, the valuation report

REPRO AUTO PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 21(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri C. M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshrepro Auto Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 177, W-7 Lane, Sainik Farms, Ward-21(2), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccr6510R Assessee By : Sh. Ashok Kumar, Ca Revenue By: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2023

depreciable and was held for more than three years and therefore a long-term capital asset.” 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of expenses amounting to Rs. 16,08,268/- made by the AO on the ground that no business was carried on as Gross

DCIT, GHAZIABAD vs. SAINT MARY'S EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE SOCIETY, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

section 50C of the Act, the depreciable assets are to be subject to short capital gain or loss if the block

M/S. SAINT MARY'S EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT (E), GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

section 50C of the Act, the depreciable assets are to be subject to short capital gain or loss if the block

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FUTURZ NEXT SERVICES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation the provisions of Section 50C of the Act does not apply, but the actual value of consideration received of Rs. 2 crores

SH. SANJAY SHARMA,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raosanjay Sharma, Ito, F-41, Site-C, Surajpur Ward-27(1), Vs. Industrial Area, New Delhi Greater Noida, Pan:Aoaps3749A (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciable assets to cover in the ambit of section 50C of Income Tax Act. 4. That Income Tax Officer was not justified

MAHESH CHAND JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Year 2008-09 Mahesh Chand Jain Vs. Ito, C/O, Jagdish Chand & Co., Ward-53(5) H-20, Lgf, Green Park New Delhi (Main), New Delhi]

section 50C. The appellant during assessment had submitted that reference could be made to the valuation officer, as adoption of the circle rate would be unfair, stating in the following lines: That the property was rented out to a known person Mr. Vinit Kumar Jain. Proprietor M/s Sidharth Metal at a rent of Rs.5,000/- (by rent agreement dated

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

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

50C of the Act without considering the reasons submitted by the appellant, and therefore, the impugned addition confirmed by the Learned CIT(A) deserves to be set-aside and the income on account of sale of the property he reassessed after giving an adequate opportunity to the appellant to represent and being heard in the matter. I.T.A. Nos.5169 & 5677/DEL/2017

ANANT RAJ LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2,CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

50C of the Act without considering the reasons submitted by the appellant, and therefore, the impugned addition confirmed by the Learned CIT(A) deserves to be set-aside and the income on account of sale of the property he reassessed after giving an adequate opportunity to the appellant to represent and being heard in the matter. I.T.A. Nos.5169 & 5677/DEL/2017

M/S. BCI OPTICAL DISC. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2011-12 Bci Optical Disc. Ltd. Income Tax Officer 2, Ssi, Industrial Area Vs Ward- 4 (2) G. T. Karnal Road, New Delhi Delhi-110033 Pan No.Aaacb0517G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Depreciation Schedule as on 01.04.2010, the WDV of the said building correctly stood at Rs. 40,72,776/- and therefore being bad in law deserves to be quashed. 2. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in not considering the factors of interest discounting, the comparable sale instances during