AMIT DHINGRA,DELHI vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

loss under the head house property by erroneously and wrongly applying section 26 of the Act which do not advance the case of Ld AO. That the appellant craves leave to add, to, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated herein above, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal

AMIT DHINGRA,DELHI vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

loss under the head house property by erroneously and wrongly applying section 26 of the Act which do not advance the case of Ld AO. That the appellant craves leave to add, to, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated herein above, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal

SH. ANKIT MITTAL,GURGAON vs. ITO, GURGAON

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

property was there the benefit was to be given towards that loss to the assessee only since the house was shown by the assessee in joint ownership with his wife for safety purposes. In that view of the matter the impugned order is set

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)

property and the assessee shall be entitled to carry forward the unutilized loss. 1.35 Similarly, the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of United Investments vs. ACIT: 511/Kol/2017 allowed the claim of set off and carry forward of long term capital loss incurred on sale of listed securities holding that merely because the capital gain on sale

PSB INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

set off of carried forward losses under the head “income from house property” and set off of business loss. 9. We have

PSB INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

set off of carried forward losses under the head “income from house property” and set off of business loss. 9. We have

PSB INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

set off of carried forward losses under the head “income from house property” and set off of business loss. 9. We have

PSB INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

set off of carried forward losses under the head “income from house property” and set off of business loss. 9. We have

M/S. TERA ESTATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we allow ground No

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishitera Estates Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, S-395, Greater Kailash, Parti-Ii, Range-16, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabct5729R (Appellant) (Respondent)

loss to be set off against the income of house property arising out of letting out these properties till the time

MS. SAI ASTHA EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

loss from earlier years are to be set off only against income from business and not against other heads of income. Admittedly, in this case the brought forward unabsorbed depreciation has been set off against the House Property

MS. SAI ASTHA EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

loss from earlier years are to be set off only against income from business and not against other heads of income. Admittedly, in this case the brought forward unabsorbed depreciation has been set off against the House Property

AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), DELHI-2 JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

loss of Rs.103.82 Crores under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession', income of Rs.782.46 Crores under the head 'Income from house property' and income of Rs.21.82 Crores under the head 'Income from other sources'. 2. With regards to the 'Income from house property', income of Rs.282.46 Crores was claimed after deducting the following

VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

loss of Rs.1,19,81,580/- was set off against income form house property Rs.20,52,542/-, against income from

VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

loss of Rs.1,19,81,580/- was set off against income form house property Rs.20,52,542/-, against income from

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

house property Less : Property 25,43,443 Tax Less : Interest 73,13,20,464 Less : 623,17,72,906 Depreciation Less : Other Business Expenditure - Marketing 9,26,78,290 Service Charges - Land Lease 7,36,63,588 713,19,78,691 Rent Income from business -130,43,39,196 Gross total income After set-off with business loss

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

house property Less : Property 25,43,443 Tax Less : Interest 73,13,20,464 Less : 623,17,72,906 Depreciation Less : Other Business Expenditure - Marketing 9,26,78,290 Service Charges - Land Lease 7,36,63,588 713,19,78,691 Rent Income from business -130,43,39,196 Gross total income After set-off with business loss

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

house property Less : Property 25,43,443 Tax Less : Interest 73,13,20,464 Less : 623,17,72,906 Depreciation Less : Other Business Expenditure - Marketing 9,26,78,290 Service Charges - Land Lease 7,36,63,588 713,19,78,691 Rent Income from business -130,43,39,196 Gross total income After set-off with business loss

M/S. MALTI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 649/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 650/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Malti Builders Pvt. Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 41, Ff-1, 1St Floor, Friends Tax, Central Circle-23, Colony(East), New Delhi-110065 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Axmpk7608P Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Garg, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.06.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 26.11.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi.

loss" of Rs.13,12,408/- (as has been claimed as set off against the income under the head 'Income from House Property