DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Dlf Home Developers Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, 9Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Sansad Delhi-1, Marg, New Delhi-110001. New Delhi Pan-Aaccd0037H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.S.Singhvi, Ca & Shri Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Shri Surender Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

391 to 394 of the Paper Book wherein it is claimed by the assessee that the assessee has declared total rental income of INR 21,19,13,543/- out of which INR 2,20,11,122/- was offered under the head “income from house property” relating to units which were held as inventory and were let out during the year

SUNITA SANJAY KEDIA,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2013-14 Sunita Sanjay Kedia, Vs. Ito, B-404, Central Park, Ward-4(3), Sector-42, Gurgaon. Gurgaon. Pan: Abipk6266D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2018 Order

house property at K-505, 5th Floor, Block-K, Gesco, Central Park, Sector-42, Gurgaon, on account of interest paid on home loan taken. Since the assessee has not declared any rental income from this property, the Assessing Officer asked him to explain the same. The assessee submitted that the property was vacant throughout the year and, therefore

J.K.V.B. PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit

House Property the rental Income was considered to be 4,27,96,283. The learned lower authorities grossly erred in law and on facts in not allowing these expenses as deduction from the gross rent received to determine the Annual Letting Value of the Property. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT USHA GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SATYA REALTORS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House India Pvt. Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 145 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the full value of the consideration is neither the market value nor necessarily the price stated in the document for sale but the price actually arrived at between the parties to the transaction. The court pointed out that though

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 35(1)(ii) and names of institutes covered under CSIR. Page 6 of 25 ITA Nos.- 716/Del/2016 and three others appeals. M/s Delhi Tourism Transportation Corporation Ltd. 14. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): Confirmation by CRRI for receipts of payment from DTTDC 15. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): order of DCIT (Exemption) New Delhi u/s 10(23C)(iv) regarding

M/S. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 35(1)(ii) and names of institutes covered under CSIR. Page 6 of 25 ITA Nos.- 716/Del/2016 and three others appeals. M/s Delhi Tourism Transportation Corporation Ltd. 14. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): Confirmation by CRRI for receipts of payment from DTTDC 15. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): order of DCIT (Exemption) New Delhi u/s 10(23C)(iv) regarding

M/S. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 35(1)(ii) and names of institutes covered under CSIR. Page 6 of 25 ITA Nos.- 716/Del/2016 and three others appeals. M/s Delhi Tourism Transportation Corporation Ltd. 14. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): Confirmation by CRRI for receipts of payment from DTTDC 15. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): order of DCIT (Exemption) New Delhi u/s 10(23C)(iv) regarding

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORATION CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 35(1)(ii) and names of institutes covered under CSIR. Page 6 of 25 ITA Nos.- 716/Del/2016 and three others appeals. M/s Delhi Tourism Transportation Corporation Ltd. 14. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): Confirmation by CRRI for receipts of payment from DTTDC 15. Re. Ground No. 4 (Deptt): order of DCIT (Exemption) New Delhi u/s 10(23C)(iv) regarding

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

SUMAN KISHORE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

Date of order: 9th November, 2011 vs. ASHA DALMIA

391 it was observed: “The act of holding over after the expiration of the term does not create a tenancy of any kind. If a tenant remains in possession after the determination of the lease, the common law rule is that he is a tenant on sufferance. A distinction should be drawn between a tenant continuing in possession after

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MEERA CHATTERJEE

391 it was observed: “The act of holding over after the expiration of the term does not create a tenancy of any kind. If a tenant remains in possession after the determination of the lease, the common law rule is that he is a tenant on sufferance. A distinction should be drawn between a tenant continuing in possession after