RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

house properties. In the assessment order of above said period the Ld. AO has not brought any single instance of incriminating material on the basis of which addition could have been made w.r.t. business income of assessee in support to justify increase profit percentile. In the assessment order the observation of the AO while estimating net profit @ 11% of Gross

M/S K.M.GASES PVT.LTD.(NOW K.M.VYAPAR PVT.LTD),KANPUR vs. DY. CIT-VI, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S K.M. Gases Pvt. Ltd. V. The Dcit-Vi (Now Known As K.M. Vyapar Pvt. Ltd.) Kanpur 11, Moti Bhawan, 52/1, Collectorgant Kanpur (U.P) Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R

house property at Rs.57,41,669/- after claiming deductions under section 24 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) and had also shown loss of Rs.4,68,861/- from Business/Profession. The Computation of Income filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings also revealed that the assessee had claimed deduction under section

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

house\nproperties. In the assessment order of above said period the Ld. AO has not\nbrought any single instance of incriminating material on the basis of which\naddition could have been made w.r.t. business income of assessee in\nsupport to justify increase profit percentile. In the assessment order the\nobservation of the AO while estimating net profit @ 11% of Gross

PRECIOUS BJUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,BAREILLY vs. PCIT, , BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.66/Lkw/2022 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Precious Buildtech Pvt Ltd V. Pcit Harmony Apartment, Adiacent Income Tax Department, To Bedi International School, Bareilly-243001. Dental College Road, Pilibhit Bypass Road, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aagcp1255R अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Mazhar Akram, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24 07 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 30 09 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

house property”. (v) Besides, being the demonetization assessment year, the AO was required to examine the genuineness of the source of the cash deposits in old SBNSs, if any. CBDT vide internal guidance note for assistance of AOs for verification of cash deposits and framing of assessments in demonetization related cases dated: 13.06.2019 (F.No. 225/145/2019- ITA-II) has issued approach

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Housing & Development Board, ITA No. 114/2O10- The judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court relates to A.Y. Page 52 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 2003-04, and the question of law raised was as follows: - "Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that without exhausting the provisions contained in section

M/S AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY,FAIZABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

housing plots through which the Revenue was being generated by the assessee was \nexactly the same to that adopted by any other builder or colonizer. The assessee could not be \nheld to be charitable because of interest charged by it on delayed payments and it was further \nobserved that it was not as though the same property was being sold

M/S AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (FORMELY AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),LUCKNOW vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

In the result all six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

housing plots through which the Revenue was being generated by the assessee was \nexactly the same to that adopted by any other builder or colonizer. The assessee could not be \nheld to be charitable because of interest charged by it on delayed payments and it was further \nobserved that it was not as though the same property was being sold

M/S AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY,FAIZABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

housing plots through which the Revenue was being generated by the assessee was \nexactly the same to that adopted by any other builder or colonizer. The assessee could not be \nheld to be charitable because of interest charged by it on delayed payments and it was further \nobserved that it was not as though the same property was being sold

JCIT(OSD), CC-1, LKO, LUCKNOW vs. ACP TOLLWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the Cross\nObjection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

property to the exclusion of all others. The Hon'ble\nApex Court in the above mentioned judgement has further held that the\nvery concept of depreciation suggests that the tax benefit on account of\ndepreciation legitimately belongs to one who has invested in the capital\nasset, is utilizing the capital asset and thereby loosing gradually\ninvestment caused by wear

M/S AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(FORMERLY AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),AYODHYA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

housing plots through which the Revenue was being generated by the assessee was exactly the same to that adopted by any other builder or colonizer. The assessee could not be held to be charitable because of interest charged by it on delayed payments and it was further observed that it was not as though the same property was being sold

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

properties, movable and immovable; and (e) All moneys received by the Authority by way of rents and profits or in any other manner or From any other source. (f) The fund shall be applied towards meeting the expenses incurred by the Authority 1n the Administration of this Act and for no other purposes. 3. (8). All these provisions