DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSIN LTD ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

FASHION GROUP INTERNATIONAL,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT

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

section 50C of the Act. 7. On careful consideration of above submission, first of all, we note that undisputedly the assessee had purchased two properties for construction of factory building vide two separate agreement to sale against total consideration of Rs. 55,55,555/- copies of which are placed at paper book at pages

GURBAKSHISH SINGH BATRA,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT - 12, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs Pr.Cit-12, E-1511, Wazir Nagr, New Delhi. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Pan: Adspb2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd March, 2021 Of The Pcit, Delhi-12, Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 6Th October, 2016 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.44,86,160/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For ‘Limited Scrutiny’ Based On The Following Reasons:-

50C(ii) lay 23 down that where the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that the valuation adopted and assessed or assessable by the Stamp Valuation Authority under sub-section (i) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the transfer, the Assessing Officer 'may' refer the valuation of the capital asset to Valuation Officer. Thus, going

VINIT KUMAR ,MEERUT vs. DCIT,CC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both appeals of the different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

House No.4, Krishna Garden Central Circle, Ganga Nagar, Vs Ghaziabad Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-250001 PAN-ARGPK9170J Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, Adv & Ms. Ayushi Gupta, CA Revenue by Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 11.05.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, These are appeals by two assessees directed against the respective orders

VIJAY KUMAR ,MEERUT vs. DCIT,CC, GZBD

In the result, both appeals of the different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

House No.4, Krishna Garden Central Circle, Ganga Nagar, Vs Ghaziabad Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-250001 PAN-ARGPK9170J Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, Adv & Ms. Ayushi Gupta, CA Revenue by Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 11.05.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, These are appeals by two assessees directed against the respective orders

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. RAKESH KUMAR GARG, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri N.K. Billaiya

property as per section 50C of the I.T. Act and not as per the share purchase agreement. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in not taking into consideration the findings of the AO that the assessee adopted the modus operandi to transfer of shares of a company having only asset of land

HARKIRAN COMMAR,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT-10, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalpr. Commissioner Of Mrs. Harkiran Commar Income Tax-10, 28, Poorvi Marg, Vs. New Delhi Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 Pan: Aagpc2911C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sanjiv Chaudhary, Ca Sh. Anil Chopra, Ca & Sh. Praveen Kumar, Ca Department By Sh. Surender Pal, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2025 O R D E R

Section 50C are applicable in this case. (0) Deduction was allowable u/s 54F and not u/s 54 on the incorrect ground that the property sold is "plot of land" as against "Farm House

ANUBHAV KAPOOR,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

section 50C of the Act. The AO further noted that the assessee had purchased new residential property for Rs.95,00,000/- and had paid stamp duty of Rs.6,55,000/- on 08.08.2016. The AO on examination on details of payments made to the seller to acquire new residential house

BHAGVAT SINGH,KHURJA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), BULANDSHAHR

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmabhagvat Singh, Vs. Ito, C/O. Jai Kisha, Adv, 86, Ward-1(3), Nai Basti, Khurja, Aligarh Bulandshahr (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dbwps8579E

50C of the Act, the addition has been rightly sustained. 8. Giving thoughtful consideration to the matter on record the bench is of considered opinion that controversy shrinks to the question what is the crucial date for determining transfer for the purpose of section 2(47) of the Act when the date of agreement for sale of property is different

NINA LUTHRA,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), NOIDA

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Nina Luthra, F No 20, Sector-37, Vs. Ito, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Ward-1(2), Pan: Actpl6023F Noida (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 50C at Rs. 1,59,41,035/-. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee objected to the adoption of stamp duty valuation. The ld AO noted that the assessee has objected at a very late stage and there is no sufficient time left to refer the matter to the District Valuation Officer for valuation. He further held that

MANJEET SINGH BALI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Manjeet Singh Bali, Vs Ito, C/O-Ravi Kumar & Co., Cas, Ward-1(4), House No.64, Sector-9, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad-201001. Pan-Acepb5753B Appellant Respondent Appellant By S/Shri Gagan Kumar & Vivek Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 11.05.2022

House No.64, Sector-9, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad-201001. PAN-ACEPB5753B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by S/Shri Gagan Kumar & Vivek Kumar, Advocate Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 11.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement 11.05.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is directed against the order

DELIGHT PROPCON PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S Delight Propcon Private Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Limited Shop No. 68, Building Income Tax, No. 38, Surya House, Near Central Circle-Ii, New Cgo Pnb Devil Road, Khanpur, Complex, N. H. Iv, Nit New Delhi Faridabad, Haryana-121001 Pan: Aadcd6203E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. S. Nagar, Ca Revenue By Sh. Suman Malik, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025 Order

House, Near Central Circle-II, New CGO PNB Devil Road, Khanpur, Complex, N. H. IV, NIT New Delhi Faridabad, Haryana-121001 PAN: AADCD6203E Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. S. S. Nagar, CA Revenue by Sh. Suman Malik, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed

PRADEEP WIG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

house or flat) and owned by a ‘non- natural person’ (NNP). A non-natural person is a corporate entity, such as a company, limited liability partnership, trust or investment scheme. To be classed as a dwelling, the property must be: • Used exclusively or in part as a residence • In the process of being adapted or constructed as a residence

ACIT CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ansal Housing Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Ansal Circle-2(2), Housing & Construction Ltd.), New Delhi 606, 6Th Floor, Indra Prakash, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. M/S. Ansal Housing & Circle-2(2), Construction Ltd., New Delhi 15, Ugf, Indraprakash Building, 21 Barakhamba, Cp, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Manisha Sharma, Adv. Sh. Jitendra Bhati, Ca Department By Sh. Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. Dr

property” under section 22 of the Act. Both the parties are very much ad idem that the instant issue is no more res integra in the assessee’s case as the hon’ble jurisdiction high court in CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 213 Taxman 143(Del) has already decided the same in the department