SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

transferred in the Demat account of the assessee are from the same person who has sold the shares on online trading platform of the Bombay stock exchange. This information could have been availed from the depository. AYs: 2016-17& 2017-18 viii. We have also been informed that there is standard operating procedure set up by the department

PRATEEK GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. PR, CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 Prateek Gupta, Vs. Pr. Cit 152, Chanderpuri, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201001 Pan Atbpg8602J (Appellant) (Respondent)

transfer form, copy of share certificate. The assessee also filed copy of bank statement reflecting the payment receipts through banking channel of Rs. 17,80,261/-. The assessee claimed profit on sale of shares of Rs. 17,80,261/- as exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. 4. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO confronted the assessee with

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5231/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2005-06 Ita No. 5392/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 Ita No. 5579/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S Majestic Properties (P) Ltd., Central Circle-2, 1/18B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm7158E Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Shivani Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022

transferred to the account of the person 8H (Coded language) account. 7. Opposite side of Page No. 4 This page is an account of the person N-166 (Coded language). The date mentioned on this page is 01.04.03 means this page pertains to the F.Y.2003-04 relevant to the A.Y. 2004-05. The total amount involved is 13.18 means

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5231/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2005-06 Ita No. 5392/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 Ita No. 5579/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S Majestic Properties (P) Ltd., Central Circle-2, 1/18B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm7158E Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Shivani Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022

transferred to the account of the person 8H (Coded language) account. 7. Opposite side of Page No. 4 This page is an account of the person N-166 (Coded language). The date mentioned on this page is 01.04.03 means this page pertains to the F.Y.2003-04 relevant to the A.Y. 2004-05. The total amount involved is 13.18 means

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5231/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2005-06 Ita No. 5392/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 Ita No. 5579/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S Majestic Properties (P) Ltd., Central Circle-2, 1/18B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm7158E Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Shivani Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022

transferred to the account of the person 8H (Coded language) account. 7. Opposite side of Page No. 4 This page is an account of the person N-166 (Coded language). The date mentioned on this page is 01.04.03 means this page pertains to the F.Y.2003-04 relevant to the A.Y. 2004-05. The total amount involved is 13.18 means

M/S. BHUSHAN STEEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

price is arrived is part of the contract and there is no material brought on record by the AO to show that the assessee has in fact received the discount money as on-money. Therefore, we are inclined to agree with the findings of the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 9. With regard

SOLITAIRE REALINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed

price is arrived is part of the contract and\nthere is no material brought on record by the AO to show that the assessee\nhas in fact received the discount money as on-money. Therefore, we are\ninclined to agree with the findings of the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, ground\nno.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.\n9. With regard

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. SOLITAIRE REALINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed

price is arrived is part of the contract and\nthere is no material brought on record by the AO to show that the assessee\nhas in fact received the discount money as on-money. Therefore, we are\ninclined to agree with the findings of the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, ground\nno.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.\n9. With regard

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. SOLITAIRE REALINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed

price is arrived is part of the contract and\nthere is no material brought on record by the AO to show that the assessee\nhas in fact received the discount money as on-money. Therefore, we are\ninclined to agree with the findings of the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, ground\nno.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.\n9. With regard