Here is Portfolio page of Rajeev, with all his work

HC has no jurisdiction in penalty imposition case, if on cogent reasons by ITAT.
Nov. 02, 2015
Penalty was imposed on non production of books of accounts. On appeal HC dismissed the appeal holding that where appellant challenged sufficiency of evidence only & there is some material, justifying order once passed by Tribunal, HC not to interfere in matter where penalty has been imposed legally on basis of cogent reasons. In this case question of law is not involved but the appellant challenged the sufficiency of evidence only.-010553
Strict parameter laid, to be followed for registration as charitable society, HC
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee-society was charitable institution u/s 2(15). It ran school. AO denied Rs.5 lacks given by 'S' to school as given for charitable purpose. CIT & Tribuanl dismissed appeal against it. On appeal HC held, organization will have to measure up to strict parameters laid down to continue to enjoy benefit of exemption from payment of Income-tax, failing which it may be deprived of its registration as charitable institution & benefit of exemption....
Applicant held not liable to tax in India in view of DTAA between India & USA.
Nov. 02, 2015
Discounted margin described as income by way of interest within meaning of Sec. 2(28A) & Sec. 9(1)(v) by AO. On appeal AAR held, discounting of bill of exchange or promissory note being a purchase of instrument as it were & especially when it is discounted without recourse, it has to be held that applicant is not liable to tax in India in view of DTAA between India & USA. Applicant will not be subject to withholding of tax u/s 195 of I.T.Act.-010557
Loss from speculative transactions not on higher footing than business loss.
Nov. 03, 2015
Assessee derived income from business, house property as also from speculative transactions. It claimed set off of loss suffered on sale & purchase of shares u/s 43(5) against income from property. AO denied it. On appeal Tribunal held, loss from speculative transactions could not stand on higher footing than business loss so as to qualify for set off against other income. On appeal HC held, Tribunal justified in rejecting assessee's claim.-010562
Interest from deposits of Co-operative Bank held, arising from its business. SC
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee bank received interest on deposits. It was assessed as 'income from other sources'. On Ref. HC held interest from investments was no part of Bank's business profits exempt from taxation. On appeal SC held, Under bye-laws, object of bank, to carry on general business of banking. HC was erroneous in treating interest derived from deposits as not arising from business of bank. Thus, not falling within income exempted under notification.-010488
AO held unjustified in refusing to renew registration without hearing assessee.
Nov. 03, 2015
Assessee was partnership firm. Assessee filed income in delayed time due to which notice u/s 142(1) & Sec.148 were issued. AO refused continuation of registration u/s 144 & 139. CIT & Tribunal upheld it. On appeal HC held, AO not right in refusing to renew registration without issuing show-cause notice & without affording any opportunity of hearing to assessee for explaining delay in furnishing declaration within specified time u/s 184(7).-010561
Assessee held entitled to deduct'n claim u/s 54 I.T.Act. as CBDT circular, ITAT
Dec. 11, 2015
Assessee in return showed amt. as long-term capital gain. It claimed deduct'n u/s 54D in respect of capital gain from sale of bungalow. AO held Sec. 54D applicable in case of compulsory acquisition of lands and buildings . Thus, rejected assessee's claim. CIT(A) allowed it on appeal as due to inadvertent typographical error wrong Sec. was mentioned. On appeal ITAT held, assessee entitled to deduct'n u/s 54 as per facts of case & CBDT circular.
CIT held right in annulling order of successor AO as was overruling previous AO.
Nov. 03, 2015
On notice of fact that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was re-opened u/s 147 & AO passed order u/s 143(3). On appeal CIT held against AO. On appeal ITAT allowed order passed by AO. On appeal HC held that by invocation of Sec.147, successor AO sat over decision of earlier AO order passed u/s 143(3) with respect to issues sought to be covered under section 147. Thus, CIT was justified in anulling order of successor AO.-000300
DVO's report rightly corroborate statement made by assessee before I.T. Dept, HC
Dec. 24, 2015
AO was not satisfied, as purchase amt. did'nt reflect real value of investm't of assessee in property. AO referred it to DVO. On ground of income concealment AO levied penalty. CIT(A) & ITAT upheld it. On appeal HC held, Tribunal erred in holding that DVO's report did'nt corroborate statement made by assessee before income-tax authorities. ITAT right in accepting consideration as reflected in rgd. sale deed did not suffer from any legal infir...