ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. VIREET INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Circle 17 (1) Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 21D, Friends Colony West, New Delhi – 110 065. (Pan : Aaacv2033M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2004-05 On 31.10.2004 Declaring Income Of Rs.34,80,69,911/-. The Same Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The 2 Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) On 28.12.2004. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. In Response, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Attended From Time To Time & Submitted Relevant Information As Called For. 3. The Assessee Was Incorporated On 03.10.1983 With The Main Objects, As Per Memorandum Of Association, To Acquire & Hold Shares, Stocks, Debentures, Debenture Stocks, Bonds, Obligations & Securities Issued Or Guaranteed By Any Company Constituted Or Carried On Business In The Republic Of India. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Make The Following Additions In The Assessment Completed U/S 143 (3) Of The Act :-

Short term Capital Gain treated as Rs. 16,14,264/- business income 2. Disallowance of Capital loss on transfer Rs. 40,60,000/- 73 of shares of PDK Shenaj Hotels Pvt. Ltd 3. Disallowance of all Expenses debited to Rs. 86,04,017/- 58 profit and loss account 4. Disallowance of Donation paid u/s

SHARWAN KUMAR SETHI,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT-17, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shripradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Short Term Capital Gain vide order dated 27/12/2019 passed u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act. Pursuant to the order passed u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, a penalty proceeding has been initiated u/s 271

HERSH VARDHAN KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

short-term capital gain as this is not a case of sale of underlying assets owned by the Company. The Assessee has not transferred depreciable assets and has never claimed depreciation as well. The Assessee was not the owner of such assets and was not even entitled to claim depreciation. 18. That, even otherwise, the holding period, the full value

NINA KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT.TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

short-term capital gain as this is not a case of sale of underlying assets owned by the Company. The Assessee has not transferred depreciable assets and has never claimed depreciation as well. The Assessee was not the owner of such assets and was not even entitled to claim depreciation. 18. That, even otherwise, the holding period, the full value

SANGITA KSHETRY,NOIDA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE INT.TAX. 2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

short-term capital gain as this is not a case of sale of underlying assets owned by the Company. The Assessee has not transferred depreciable assets and has never claimed depreciation as well. The Assessee was not the owner of such assets and was not even entitled to claim depreciation. 18. That, even otherwise, the holding period, the full value

DCIT, CIRCLE- 20(2), NEW DELHI vs. RADHARANI ORNAMENTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital gain the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income for which penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)( c) are initiated

ARUNIMA ADCON SERVICES PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 20(2), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital gain the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income for which penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)( c) are initiated

ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Short Term Capital of\nRs.54,39,625/- as the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee knew\nthat such transactions related to penny stock and therefore the assessee\ndid not disclose in his return of income and taxed the Long Term Capital\nGain ofRs.51,52,564/-, which was not contested by the assessee before\nthe ld. CIT(A).\n5. The Assessing

MR RAHUL MISHRA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII NEW DELHI

The appeal is dismissed in limine

271 (1)(c) of the Act. In the penalty order, it is recorded as under:- . ?In his original return, the assessee has claimed short term loss of Rs.4,52,00,000/- on sale of shares and has set off this loss from the long term capital gain arisen to him from sale of shares of M/s. Karamchand Domestic Products

SHAILENDRA ,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2009-10] Shailendra, Vs Ito, C/O-Vinod Kumar Goel, 282, Ward-2(3), Boundary Road, Civil Lines, Meerut. Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Cavps9753D Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.02.2023

u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be levied. He accordingly submitted that the order of the Id. CIT(A) be set- aside and the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer by cancelled. Ld. DR on the other hand strongly supported me order of the Id. CIT(A). He submitted that by not declaring the correct short term capital gain

DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), NEW DELHI vs. JARUL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

short term capital loss of Rs. 76,12,50,0001- claimed by assessee is rejected. Penalty proceedings U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for concealment of income as aforesaid and furnishing inaccurate particulars within ther meaning of explanation 1 to the sub-section (1) of the section 271(1)(c) of the Income

MRS. NEETA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (APPEALS)-XXVI, NEW DELHI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c), for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in respect of income of Rs.53,82,812/- and change of LTCG to STCG within the meaning of explanation-1 to the sub-section (1) of the section 271(1)(c) are initiated. Notice u/s. 271(1)(c) read with section 274 is being

MRS. NEETA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c), for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in respect of income of Rs.53,82,812/- and change of LTCG to STCG within the meaning of explanation-1 to the sub-section (1) of the section 271(1)(c) are initiated. Notice u/s. 271(1)(c) read with section 274 is being

MRS. NEETA GUPTA,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c), for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in respect of income of Rs.53,82,812/- and change of LTCG to STCG within the meaning of explanation-1 to the sub-section (1) of the section 271(1)(c) are initiated. Notice u/s. 271(1)(c) read with section 274 is being

SHYAM SUNDER KANSAL,U.P vs. WARD 2(3)(2), U.P

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

term capital gain. During the assessment, the AO verified the claim of commission of Rs. 2,50,000/- and improvement expenditure of Rs. 50,000. The AO asked the assessee to produce documentary evidences regarding the claim made by the assessee. That the matter being old, the assessee could not produce the evidences and as such the AO estimated

SUVENDU BANARJEE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-30(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7436/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Suvendu Banarjee, Vs Acit, B-137, Chittranjan Park, Circle-30(1), New Delhi-110019 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapb0869L Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.03.2022

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.1,02,540/-. The assessee had claimed long term capital loss while filing the return of income for the year under consideration amounting to Rs.62,51,836/- whereas during the assessment proceedings, assessee offered an amount of Rs.3,38,416/- as taxable short term capital gain

DCIT, CIRCLE- 13(1), NEW DELHI vs. JAGSON INTERNATIONAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

short term capital gain were confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his appellate order dated 23.12.2015. In response to penalty notices under section 271(1)(c) issued on 30.11.2015 and 03.03.2017 no reply was made by the assessee. The Ld. AO therefore passed order on 28.03.2017 imposing penalty of Rs. 55,58,014/- under section 271

MEENA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 43(6), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Meena Singhal, Vs Ito, C-3/52,Rajashthali Apartment, Ward-43(6), Pitampura, New Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Acaps1872L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pranshu Singhal, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2023

short term capital gain on sale of shares. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the penalty ignoring the fact mere additions per se cannot be the basis for imposing the penalty u/s 271