RAM MOHAN RAI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiram Mohan Rai, Vs. Acit, A-8/25, Vansant Vihar, Circle-33(1), New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaapr0728C (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of deduction under section 54 of the income tax act. Consequently, assessment under section 143 (3) of the income tax act was passed on 24/02/2016 determining total income of the assessee at to Rs. 14230750/- against a returned income of Rs. 7648330/–. Assessee, aggrieved with the order of the Ld. assessing officer preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner

SMT. KIRAN KAMRA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Kiran Kamra, Vs. Ito, 2286, Hudson Line, Ward-36(1), G.T.B. Nagar, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan: Aaqpk8729C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate & Shri V. Raj Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2019 Order

section 54 and 54EC and came to the conclusion that in order to avail the exemption u/s 54EC, the capital gain amount has to be invested in a long-term specified asset within a period of six months from the date of transfer. Since the assessee in the instant case has invested the amount of Rs.50 lakhs on 21st March

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Learned CIT(A), however, sustained the penalty on account of inclusion of capital gain on sale of shares of Dabur Pharma in the profit and loss account for the purpose of Section 115JB of the Act and sustained the penalty. The assessee is in this appeal before us challenging the same

SANJEEV JAIN,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, SAHARANPUR

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

Bench: Sh. R.K. Pand & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2013-14

54E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was claimed. 4 The Assessing Officer has held that neither the purchase nor sale of shares were genuine and that the amount of Rs.1,41,08,484/- stated to have been received by Assessee on sale of shares was undisclosed income and accordingly made addition under section 69 of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ONKARESHWAR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 40,55,600/- (B.1) Thereafter, penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act was levied by the Assessing Officer (“AO”, for short) vide order dated 26.02.2016, amounting to Rs. 16,47,08,371/- which was @ 100% of tax sought to be evaded. Against the penalty order dated 26.02.2016, assessee appealed before

M/S. ONKARESHWAR PROPERTIES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Disallowance of expenses u/s 14A of Rs. 40,55,600/-. 2. The facts in brief qua the first issue are that, the assessee is a private limited company which has shown long term capital gain of Rs. 117,67,97,883/- in its return of income. During the year under consideration assessee had sold a land measuring 133 Kanal

ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

54E, 8[54EA, 54EB,] 54F 2[, 54G and 54H]]]]], be chargeable to\nincome-tax under the head \"Capital gains\", and shall be deemed to be the\nincome of the previous year in which the transfer took place.\n9. 2. The computation of capital gains as filed by the assessee\nregarding sale consideration of Rs.45,95,177/- of the Lucknow property