TATA CUMMINS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1-JAMSHEDPUR AND THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

house property D - Profits and gains of business or profession E - Capital gains F - Income from other sources 8.1. The income in the present case, if at all, is traceable to 'Capital gains' which is one of the heads of income. If by application of the provisions of Section 45 read with Section 48 which are integrally connected with each

SRI ANAND KUMAR DHANUKA ,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.163/Ran/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

Section 10] (Departmental Circular No.346, dated 30.06.1982) [5.11] It is, therefore, clear that the purpose is to give this benefit on the ownership of one residential house only by the assessee and to encourage to have one residential house of the assessee. Therefore, right from the sale of original asset till the purchase and/or construction of the residential house

ASHOK KUMAR MALHOTRA,DHANBAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DHANBAD

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy)

house cannot convert agricultural land into non-agricultural land. She prayed for relief. 5. Rival contentions heard. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record and the case law cited, we hold as follows. 6. The ld. CIT(A) at the last paragraph of his order records the fact

ASHOK BEHL,RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Ashok Behl Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi 1St Floor, Samridhi Complex, South Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi – 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adwpb2438E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

property i.e Flat No.702, 7th Floor , Vasundhara Elegance, Argora, Ranchi for consideration of Rs. 66, 00, 000/- which was acquired by the assessee on 30.05.2011 vide sale deed no. 12391 at cost of Rs. 20,21,200/-. The assessee had paid a sum of Rs.1,08,000/- as stamp duty and Rs.81,301/- as registration fee. The computation of capital

ACIT CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD vs. SRI VIKASH AGARWAL, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

house property. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed from the ACIT Vs Sri Vikash Agarwal audit report filed by the assessee that the assessee has taken unsecured loans of ₹ 1.00 crore from M/s Amar Steels, ₹ 1,40,27,614/- from M/s Kamdhenu Enterprises and ₹ 36,10,000/- from M/s JDK Furnitech. Regarding the unsecured loan from M/s Amar

SUNITA ADUKIA,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

section 54F was not allowed against the income from sale proceeds of the flat. Hence, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ld A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in treating the activity of self-constructed building on own land and selling the flats subsequently as adventure in nature of trade and ignoring the fact that

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19,36,530/-. Subsequently, Ld. AO recorded the reasons to believe stating that assessee has claimed long term capital gain as exempt income amounting to Rs.1,83,47,999/- which has not been substantiated during the survey proceedings u/s. 133A and thereafter

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19,36,530/-. Subsequently, Ld. AO recorded the reasons to believe stating that assessee has claimed long term capital gain as exempt income amounting to Rs.1,83,47,999/- which has not been substantiated during the survey proceedings u/s. 133A and thereafter

M/S MANIKARAN POWER LTD,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayit(Ss)A No. 01/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) A.C.I.T., Manikaran Power Limited, Central Circle-2, Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Vs. Ranchi. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) J.C.I.T. (In Situ), Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Ranchi. Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee Manikaran Power Limited, A.C.I.T., Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Central Circle-2, Vs. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee

properties which were rented to the assessee and the same was disallowed under Section 37(1) of the Act. It was a submissions that on appeal, the ld. CIT(A) held that in respect of the issue of bogus purchases, the same could not be considered under Section 68 of the Act and the same was liable to be considered

ITO WARD-2(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BAJAJ, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

house. He transferred the ownership by agreement of sale dated 09/08/2008 for the consideration of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Shri Om Prakash Bajaj, paid the consideration by four cheques of IDBI Bank. They were of Rs. 1,00,000/- dated 05/08/2008, Rs. 1,00,000/- dated 02/09/2008, Rs.8,00,000/- dated 23/10/2008 and Rs.7,51,000/- dated 23/10/2010 aggregating

SRI AJAY KUMAR ,HAZARIBAGH vs. ITO WARD-1(1), HAZARIBAGH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.243/Ran/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.207/Ran/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

House Dipugarha, Hazaribagh-825301. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AELPK 5256 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Choudhry, Advocate Respondent by :Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 06/03/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year

SHRI AJAY KUMARS/O SHRI KISAN BHAGWAT,HAZARIBAGH vs. ITO WARD-2(5), HAZARIBAGH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.243/Ran/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.207/Ran/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

House Dipugarha, Hazaribagh-825301. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AELPK 5256 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Choudhry, Advocate Respondent by :Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 06/03/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year

MISRILALL JAIN & SONS,SINGHBHUM WEST vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.468/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Misrilall Jain & Sons….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M. D. House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aabfm2851Q] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 30.07.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [PAN: AABFM2851Q] vs. ACIT, CC-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : December 18, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 21, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This