ARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1)2, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. NARASIMHA REDDY DUTHALA, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

short the “NFAC”] Delhi, relating\nto the assessment year 2022-2023.\n2.\nThe Revenue has raised the following grounds in\nthe instant appeal :\n1. “The CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case.\n2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the CT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact

ANIRUDH VENKATA RAGI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

disallow the exemption under section 10(38) of the Act and to treat the long term capital gains as income from un-explained source. Assessee contended that he realized the long term capital gains by transfer of capital asset and, therefore, in terms of section 10(38) of the Act, he is entitled to claim exemption. Page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-1(1) , TIRUPATI vs. VENKATA SWAMY RAVURI , CHITTOOR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

disallowed the same and computed the\nlong-term capital gain accordingly. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)\naccepted the assessee's contention and allowed both the full cost\nof acquisition at Rs.1,55,000/- and the cost of improvement of\nRs.35,29,170/-, thereby deleting the addition. Aggrieved, the\nRevenue is in appeal before this Tribunal.\n13.\nThe

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ALPHA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

capital gains' on account of disallowance of share premium as cost of acquisition while computing the short-term capital gains

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ALPHA VILLAS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

capital gains' on account of disallowance of share premium as cost of acquisition while computing the short-term capital gains

TN (DK) EXPRESSWAYS LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Tn(Dk) Expressways Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward -2(2), C/O. P. Murali & Co., Hyderabad. Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, 1St Floor, Somajiguda, Hyderabad – 82. Pan : Aacct5634J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao. Revenue By: Sri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 23/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y 2008-09 Arises From The Cit(A)-2, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 29.02.2016, In Case No.0226/2014-15 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

disallowed. 5.1 On the other hand, the AR contends as under : "2. The only issue in the appeal is whether the Appellant is entitled to claim interest paid on the funds utilized for making stop gap investments in SBI-SHF Liquid PLSU and in SBI Premiur Liquid Fund- Institutional Growth. The sale of investments resulted in short term capital gains

NADELLA MUNIKANNAIAH ,TIRUPATI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 N.Dathri L/R Of Late Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1) Nadella Muni Kannaiah Tirupati C/O. Katrapati & Andhra Pradesh Associates 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1St Floor Ashok Nagar,Street No.1 Hyderabad-500 020

short term capital gains for AY 2014-15. This itself shows the hollowness in the arguments of the assessee that no possession was given to the builder/ developer. As per Explanation 1 of Sec.271 (1 )(c) of the Act, penalty is leviable. Explanation 1 is as under: '[Explanation 1.-Where in respect of any facts material to the computation

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. SANJAY CHOWDARY GADDIPATI, HYDERABAD

term capital asset (hereinafter referred to as the\noriginal asset), other than a residential house and the assessee has within a period of\none year before or two years after the date on which the transfer took place\npurchased or has within a period of three years after that date constructed a new\nresidential house, then no capital gain

JOSEPH KIRAN KUMAR REDDY BASANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Joseph Kiran Kumar Reddy Income Tax, Basani, Circle 5(1), C/O. Pary & Co., Chartered Hyderabad. Accountants, No.6, 2Nd Floor, 8-2-703/Vj/6, Vijay Villa, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500034, Telangana. Pan : Agcpb8082B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vamsi Krishna Reddy, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Karthik Manickam, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2024

disallowed the deduction claimed under Section 54 of the Act on the ground that three flats sold by the assessee is a short-term capital gain

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO, (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO, (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO,(INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO, (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO, (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1

PAVAN KUMAR REDDY KADIGARI,USA vs. ITO, (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the captioned six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term capital gain, made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- under Chapter VIA and denied local tax paid at Rs.1