ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. SEEMA SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

property may be commenced even before the date of transfer of original asset... ” 3.15. In view of the above-cited position of law and interpretation of section 54 of the Act, the Assessee wishes to contend that firstly, the acquisition of house from M/s DLF is a case of construction of house and not purchase of a house, secondly

KAPIL KUMAR AGARWAL,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishikapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Ipsaa House Anm & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon Pan: Aacpa2412L (Appellant) (Respondent)

property", other than the new asset, the amount of capital gain arising from the transfer of the original asset not charged under Section 45 on the basis of the cost of such new asset as provided in clause (a), or, as the case may be, clause (b), of sub-section (1), shall be deemed to be income chargeable under

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI AKSHAY SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the 02 appeals filed by the Revenue stand

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

property may be commenced even before the date of transfer of original asset... ” 3.15. In view of the above-cited position of law and interpretation of section 54 of the Act, the Assessee wishes to contend that firstly, the acquisition of house from M/s DLF is a case of construction of house and not purchase of a house, secondly

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI PRADEEP SOBTI, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the 02 appeals filed by the Revenue stand

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

property may be commenced even before the date of transfer of original asset... ” 3.15. In view of the above-cited position of law and interpretation of section 54 of the Act, the Assessee wishes to contend that firstly, the acquisition of house from M/s DLF is a case of construction of house and not purchase of a house, secondly

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - XV vs. BHARTI MISHRA

property”, other than the new asset, the amount of capital gain arising from the transfer of the original asset not charged under Section 45 on the basis of the cost of such new asset as provided in clause (a), or, as the case may be, clause (b), of sub-section (1), shall be deemed to be income chargeable under

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

properties were held by the assessee as stock in trade and not for the purpose of letting out, 'vacancy allowance' provided under section 23(1)(c) of the Act could not be claimed. The Court also rejected the contention of the assessee that sub- section (5) inserted under section 23 of the Act, to provide for determination of notional

AGYA RAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

house property" and not under the head "Income from business" despite that the assessee had to incur expenditure in connection with such licences granted by the assessee?” Background facts 2. The facts in brief are that the Assessee was carrying on a business under the name and style of M/s. Supreme Auto Works at B-93, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase

AGYA RAM vs. COMMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

house property" and not under the head "Income from business" despite that the assessee had to incur expenditure in connection with such licences granted by the assessee?” Background facts 2. The facts in brief are that the Assessee was carrying on a business under the name and style of M/s. Supreme Auto Works at B-93, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase

SNEH GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-32(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on both counts on merit as well as jurisdictional issue raised by the assessee in the additional ground of appeal

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

house property for construction and spent entire consideration in purchase of plot and construction there on within 3 years of the sale of original assets. PB 183 is the copy of detail and source of construction expenses for the subject residential property. PB 185 is the copy of assessee's reply dated 18.12.2018 before Ld. AO against the show cause

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MODI RUBBER LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri B.P. Jain, [Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A.C.I.T Vs. M/S Modi Rubber Ltd Circle – 5(1) 4 – 7C, Dda Shopping Centre New Delhi New Friends Colony New Delhi Pan : Aaacm 2062 R [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr

house property? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act to Rs. 2,18,304/- out of Rs. 39,14,000/- is giving relief of Rs. 36,95,625/- to the assessee on adhoc basis. 4. That the order

ANJU CHAWLA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11

house property, capital gain and income from other sources. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act 1961 alongwith survey operations u/s 133 A of the Income Tax Act 1961 were undertaken at various residential and business premises of Aseem kumar Gupta & Group and other beneficiary group of cases on 26.03.2010. Shri Aseem Kumar Gupta

The Commissioner of Income Tax II

Appeal is dismissed

Section 54 was to give relief to a person who had transferred his residential house and had purchased another residential house within two years of transfer or had purchased a residential house one year before transfer. It was only the excess amount not used for making purchase or construction of the property within the stipulated period, which was taxable

MANISH TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Manish Tyagi, Vs. Ito, House No. 131, Sector-6, Ward-1(4), Chiranjeev Vihar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Acgpt1413J (Appellant) (Respondent)

house property, business income and interest income. Assessee did not maintain any books of account. AIR information was received showing that the assessee has deposited cash aggregating to Rs. 66,41,000/- in his two bank accounts with Bank of India and Syndicate Bank during the financial year. Therefore, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. The assessee

RAJ KUMAR CHAWLA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuvs Raj Kumar Chawla Acit A-7, Nirman Vihar, Central Circle-Ix Delhi. New Delhi. Aalpc1209J Appellant Respondent

house property Rs. 4,36,036/-; 2. Addition on account of un-explained loan of Rs. 2,29,73,630/-; 3. Addition on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) on protective basis Rs. 46,588/-. 3. The assessee challenged the above additions before the Ld. CIT(A) and raised various grounds of appeal. The assessee also filed application

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

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

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

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII vs. GOPAL DASS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD.

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

256/-? 2019:DHC:1682-DB 3. The above questions stand answered today by this Court by a detailed common judgment in the present appeal and other connected appeals, in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. A copy of the said judgment is placed below. 4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed and the impugned order

SMT. HARMINDER KAUR,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

sections 54 and 54F of the Income- tax Act.” 11.6.2 Regarding applicability of the circulars for booking of flats, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of RL Sood (supra) has observed as under: “2. The assessee was the owner of a residential house which he sold on 22nd Sept., 1981, for a total consideration