DR. PRANNOY ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gain which is exempt u/s 10(38) of the act is amounting to RS. 1, 08,67,12,219/–. 14. Further the learned assessing officer asked details of the immovable properties owned by the assessee and found that the property at Mussoorie is acquired by the assessee and her husband in the year prior to financial year

SMT. RADHIKA ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gain which is exempt u/s 10(38) of the act is amounting to RS. 1, 08,67,12,219/–. 14. Further the learned assessing officer asked details of the immovable properties owned by the assessee and found that the property at Mussoorie is acquired by the assessee and her husband in the year prior to financial year

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. MRS. RADHIKA ROY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gain which is exempt u/s 10(38) of the act is amounting to RS. 1, 08,67,12,219/–. 14. Further the learned assessing officer asked details of the immovable properties owned by the assessee and found that the property at Mussoorie is acquired by the assessee and her husband in the year prior to financial year

SMT. RADHIKA ROY,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital gain which is exempt u/s 10(38) of the act is amounting to RS. 1, 08,67,12,219/–. 14. Further the learned assessing officer asked details of the immovable properties owned by the assessee and found that the property at Mussoorie is acquired by the assessee and her husband in the year prior to financial year

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

disallowance of the appellant's claim regarding set off and carried forward of long-term capital loss of Rs. 1,44,73,463 against the long-term capital gain

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Capital Gain claimed by the assessee, we have already given the direction to the Assessing Officer in the earlier year, therefore, same finding will apply mutatis mutandis in this year also. 29. Now coming to the issue of disallowance

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Capital Gain claimed by the assessee, we have already given the direction to the Assessing Officer in the earlier year, therefore, same finding will apply mutatis mutandis in this year also. 29. Now coming to the issue of disallowance

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Capital Gain claimed by the assessee, we have already given the direction to the Assessing Officer in the earlier year, therefore, same finding will apply mutatis mutandis in this year also. 29. Now coming to the issue of disallowance

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

gain on sale of STT paid shares was exempt, for such reasons alone, the long term capital loss incurred on sale of STT paid shares cannot be disallowed

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 of Rs 67,87654/-. Apart from that, the assessee has also shown income from dividend which has been claimed as exempt income. 4. The assessee has filed return of income, declaring at Rs.72,16,819/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and assessment under section 143(3) has been framed on 24-12-2008 assessing

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Circle-17(1), New Delhi. 10-Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacv0132B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Cit, Vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Circle-17(1), New Delhi. 10-Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacv0132B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain and the decisions of the CIT(A) in the likely placed other cases. 3. Wherein the findings of the A.O. and the findings of the CIT(A) both are under challenge on the impugned issues. 4. Because the action is under challenge on facts and law for proportionate disallowance

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

capital gain 6,71,16,180 GroundNos.10 to 18 Treated as business income. 3. Interest income 9,00,000 Ground No.19 4. Disallowance

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 gains on sale of shares of SBPL. 22. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in observing that there was no direct nexus between the interest bearing borrowed funds and investment in shares of SBPL. Disallowance

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 :-

Capital Gain treated as Rs. 16,14,264/- business income 2. Disallowance of Capital loss on transfer Rs. 40,60,000/- 73 of shares

PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember

Gains in respect of mutual fund under the fixed maturity plans; c. That the Long Capital loss of Rs.55,64.762 should also been treated as capital loss entitled offset with the long-term income and that it cannot be treated as income from business. 2. That Both CIT(A) and AO has erred in notionally disallowing

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

capital gain by following the decision of CIT(A)’s on Principal of consistency. 2.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts in deleting the disallowance

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

capital gain.” 4.4 Hence, respectfully following the finding of the Tribunal (supra) the Grounds 1 and 2 are accordingly allowed in favour of the assessee. 4. In parity with the observations made by the Tribunal in earlier years in identical fact situation, we see no reason to entertain a different view. We thus see no error in the action

PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-20(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2014-15

capital gains as business income, without going into the facts of the relevant year and ignoring the CBDT’s circular. 3) That the CIT (Appeals)/AO has erred on facts and in law in increasing the disallowance