OMWATI,DEHRADUN vs. PR.CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshsmt. Omwati Pr. Cit W/O Sh. Dariyav Singh Dehradun 171/1, Vasant Vihar, Vs. Dehradun Pan-Aanpw 6438K (Appellant) (Respondent)

house property and income from business. The return of income for A.Y.2010-11 was filed on 30/09/2010 declaring total income of Rs.20,50,270/- showing capital gains at Nil. The assessee sold an agricultural land along with her husband Sh. Dariyav Singh and Sh. Sanjay Kumar during the year under consideration. The assessee had capital gains of Rs.35

LAT SMT. SAROJ BANSAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

section 54F of the Act in respect of reinvestment made in new house property. This action of learned Assessing Officer was upheld by learned CIT(A). 3 AY: 2013-14 5. It would be relevant to understand the behavior of the assessee with regard to the purchase and sale of the properties, which could be understood from the following table

SAURABH AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

143(3) read with section 153A for the assessment year 2011-12. Since common issues are involved in all the appeals arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. In all the appeals, common grounds have been raised which are verbatim the same

RUKMAN AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

143(3) read with section 153A for the assessment year 2011-12. Since common issues are involved in all the appeals arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. In all the appeals, common grounds have been raised which are verbatim the same

SHIV KUMAR AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

143(3) read with section 153A for the assessment year 2011-12. Since common issues are involved in all the appeals arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. In all the appeals, common grounds have been raised which are verbatim the same

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

143(3) read with section 153A for the assessment year 2011-12. Since common issues are involved in all the appeals arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. In all the appeals, common grounds have been raised which are verbatim the same

SH. DEVENDRA DUTT PANT,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT , UTTARKAHAND

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate findings refusing section 54B deduction of Rs.79,97,240/- in issue. 2 Devendra Dutt Pant 4. That being