M/S DENA BANK,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result appeals filed by the appellant are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Houses of the Legislature. Section 41 deals with the control by the State Government while section 58 deals with the dissolution of the Authority. Section 58(1) provides that where the State Government is satisfied that the purposes for which the Authority was established under this Act have been substantially achieved so as to render the continued existence

M/S STATE BANK OF PATIALA,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result appeals filed by the appellant are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Houses of the Legislature. Section 41 deals with the control by the State Government while section 58 deals with the dissolution of the Authority. Section 58(1) provides that where the State Government is satisfied that the purposes for which the Authority was established under this Act have been substantially achieved so as to render the continued existence

SATISH KUMAR DHINGRA ,HARYANA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

194A. Earlier while filing the Original Return, the Interest received on Enhanced Compensation was offered for taxation under section 56 (2)(viii) in income from other sources and 50% deduction was claimed as per Section 57(iv) but later on there was judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Hari Singh and others

ASHOK KUMAR DHINGRA ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

194A. Earlier while filing the Original Return, the Interest received on Enhanced Compensation was offered for taxation under section 56 (2)(viii) in income from other sources and 50% deduction was claimed as per Section 57(iv) but later on there was judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Hari Singh and others

SUBHASH CHAND DHINGRA ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

194A. Earlier while filing the Original Return, the Interest received on Enhanced Compensation was offered for taxation under section 56 (2)(viii) in income from other sources and 50% deduction was claimed as per Section 57(iv) but later on there was judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Hari Singh and others

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), GURGAON, GURUGRAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

house property, as amount received by AOP is for maintenance charges and common charges which is further paid by AOP for common expenses and is not chargeable on the basis of concept of mutuality. Page 5 of 10 6. That the assessment order is void and invalid in law as Assessing Officer not take effect of Tax deducted at source

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

house property, as amount received by AOP is for maintenance charges and common charges which is further paid by AOP for common expenses and is not chargeable on the basis of concept of mutuality. Page 5 of 10 6. That the assessment order is void and invalid in law as Assessing Officer not take effect of Tax deducted at source

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

house property, as amount received by AOP is for maintenance charges and common charges which is further paid by AOP for common expenses and is not chargeable on the basis of concept of mutuality. Page 5 of 10 6. That the assessment order is void and invalid in law as Assessing Officer not take effect of Tax deducted at source

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

194A 2,48,603 - 22,37,431 Net Compensation credit. Further final payment of Rs. 3,88,746/- was made on 23.02.2018. v) 05.12.2017 The assessee entered into an agreement to sell 20-24 for office space in Project Digital Greens of M/s Emaar MGF Land Ltd at Sector 61, Gurgaon, Haryana for Rs. 109 lacs. Till date of sale

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Galleria Condominium Vs Ito, Association, Galleria Building, Ward-1(3), Dlf Phase Iv, Dlf City, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaaag3018P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rishabh Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Jaishree, Ca Respondent By Shri Mithalesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

IV, DLF City, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. PAN-AAAAG3018P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Rishabh Aggarwal, CA & Ms. Jaishree, CA Respondent by Shri Mithalesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.09.2022 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM : This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-2, Gurgaon in Appeal No.447/2016-17

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

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

194A. In any case, once amount decreed by Arbitral Tribunal, it is a kind of a judgment debt and overrides the provisions of Income Tax Act; and in support, he relied upon the following judgments:- 1. Islamic Investment Co. v. UOI [2004] 265 ITR 254 (Bom.) I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DEL/2013 16 2. Madhusudan Shrikrishna v. Emkay Exports [2010] 188 Taxman

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

194A. In any case, once amount decreed by Arbitral Tribunal, it is a kind of a judgment debt and overrides the provisions of Income Tax Act; and in support, he relied upon the following judgments:- 1. Islamic Investment Co. v. UOI [2004] 265 ITR 254 (Bom.) I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DEL/2013 16 2. Madhusudan Shrikrishna v. Emkay Exports [2010] 188 Taxman

DHEERAJ THAKRAN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Dheeraj Thakran, Vs Ito, C/O Nagesh Bhel & Co., Cas, Ward-1(4), 21/25, Moti Nagar, Hsiidc Building, New Delhi. Udyog Vihar-V, Gurgaon. Pan: Aewpt8543B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.05.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

3. That CIT (A) erred in upholding the additions of Rs.4,20,000 made by the AO on account of professional income. 4. The appellant craves leave to add to or amend the aforesaid grounds before disposal of the appeal.” 9. The ld. counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the various additions

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

194A of the Act as the provisions of sec.!94A shall not apply where income is credited or paid to any banking company to which the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applied. especially when there is no dispute that Kotak Mohindra Bank Ltd, is a banking company to which the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies and further that section 19of Banking

GULSHAN HOMES AND INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DR. MANOJ KUMAR, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

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

194A\n| AYAP: 75020 Ashley Jam\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\nD5-1944\n| ADPSC354A Divya Parashar\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n1400000 2019-20\nDS 1944\n| AVCP58/58C Ashok lain\n| Salaried Perso\n| 30\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\n105-1944\n| AAAP551629 Sachin V Shah\n| Proprwtor\n| 3\n131250.00

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

housed. The expenditure for the steam, which is\nutilised in generation of power, and the balance steam which is\nutilised by the chemical plant can be determined by distributing the\nsame in proportion to the heat value (Enthalpy) of the inlet steam\nand the outlet steam of the turbine. As per the details available on\nrecord the heat value