JAGATPAL GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

disallowance of Rs. 522036/- made by the Assessing Officer in terms of section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 4. That the Learned CIT (Appeals) has further erred by treating the declared short term capital gain

JAGAT PAL GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

disallowance of Rs. 522036/- made by the Assessing Officer in terms of section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 4. That the Learned CIT (Appeals) has further erred by treating the declared short term capital gain

NIKESH ARORA,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGON

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: We Proceed To Deal With The Substantive Issues Arising

term capital gain. In this regard, it is to state that while passing the assessment order, the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee and held gain on transactions of shares as short

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)

short term 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

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

Short Term Capital Gain: Being capital gain on sale of 3,37,202/- office space in Project Digital Greens of M/s Emaar MGF Land Ltd. at Sector 61, Gurgaon, Haryana. (Long term capital loss of Rs. 81,42,760/- as claimed by assessee disallowed

SANGEETA DEVI JHUNJHUNWALA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-70(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

Disallowance on claim of exemption u/s. 10(38) of the Act on Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 1,17,34,753/-. b. Addition of Rs. 2,11,226/- u/s 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” Ground No. 2 and 3 are only arguments in support of ground No. 1(a) and ground No. 1(b) 3. The facts

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

Short Term Capital Loss or any other sham transactions. 5. It is reiterated that the above principles have been formulated with the sole objective of reducing litigation and maintaining consistency in approach on the issue of treatment of income derived from transfer of shares and securities. All the relevant provisions of the Act shall continue to apply on the transactions

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

short ‘the learned CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15, raising the following grounds: 1) That the CIT (Appeals)/ AO has erred on facts and in law in taxing the income from long term listed equities of Rs 3,19,01,839 declared by the assessee as capital gains as business income, without going into the facts of the relevant

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)

Short term capital gain on sale of shares; Long term capital gain on debt funds; and Long term capital gain from sale of equity shares, then while computing the taxable income, the whole of income would be computed in the total 23 | P a g e income and only the portion of Long term capital gain on sale of equity

SURESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2011-12 Appellant Respondent Shri Suresh Kumar Agarwal The Assistant Commissioner Of 154, Deepali Enclave Vs. Income Tax Pitampura Central Circle -25 New Delhi New Delhi Pan :- Abvpk1318H ( Appellant ) ( Respondent ) Date Of Hearing 17-06-2020 Date Of Order 29.06.2020 Present For Assessee Shri Gautam Jain , Advocate Present For Income Tax Department :- Shri Saras Kumar Senior Departmental Representative O R D E R

short-term capital loss by various beneficiaries. Based upon outcome of such investigation and analysis of the data, the system directorate has uploaded details of such information in respect of individual assesses who have made transactions in such penny stocks. 2. The investigation carried out by the Department has proved that assessee was hatched by various players to obtain/provide accommodation

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

short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2013-14 raising following grounds: 1. That both the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. AO erred similarly in law and in facts that income from Capital Gains as declared by the assessee was taken as income from business as follows: 2 ITA No. 3785/Del./2017 a. That the long-term capital gains

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

Disallowance u/s.14A 5,33,768 GroundNos.20 to 22 (not pressed) 6. The assessee questioned the above addition before the Learned CIT(Appeals) raising the issue regarding taxing the profits realized on sale of shares as business income against capital gain offered by the assessee either under long term capital gain or short

SANJAY KAUL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-24(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

disallow the claim of Short Term capital Loss and to treat the same as income from undisclosed sources. Therefore, the addition of Rs, 1,22,76,352/- on account of Short Term capital Loss made by the AO is confirmed. This ground of appeal is ruled against the appellant. The other additions of Rs. 3,06,908/- being consequential

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)

Short Term Capital Gains on the premise that these shares were a part of design to hold interest in Hutchison/ Vodafone group and transferring them at their will and hence, they should not get the benefit of Long Term Capital gains (LTCG) before 36 months. On share valuation 9. That the CIT(A) erred on facts

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

short-term capital gain 2,60,00,788 3 Share of the assessee at the rate of 50% 1,30,00,394/- 4 Further, learned assessing officer considered that 25,03,259 shares sold on 17/4/2008 amounting to RS. 1,08,53,58,953/– and STT thereon of RS. 13,61,460/– resulting into total sale consideration

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

short-term capital gain 2,60,00,788 3 Share of the assessee at the rate of 50% 1,30,00,394/- 4 Further, learned assessing officer considered that 25,03,259 shares sold on 17/4/2008 amounting to RS. 1,08,53,58,953/– and STT thereon of RS. 13,61,460/– resulting into total sale consideration

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

short-term capital gain 2,60,00,788 3 Share of the assessee at the rate of 50% 1,30,00,394/- 4 Further, learned assessing officer considered that 25,03,259 shares sold on 17/4/2008 amounting to RS. 1,08,53,58,953/– and STT thereon of RS. 13,61,460/– resulting into total sale consideration

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

Bench: Shri Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

short-term capital gain 2,60,00,788 3 Share of the assessee at the rate of 50% 1,30,00,394/- 4 Further, learned assessing officer considered that 25,03,259 shares sold on 17/4/2008 amounting to RS. 1,08,53,58,953/– and STT thereon of RS. 13,61,460/– resulting into total sale consideration