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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 54F of the Act, on account of investment in new house property situated at Lucknow without appreciating that the assessee had owned property more than three houses prior to the new investment in house property donated by violation of provisions of section

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s \n54F of the Act, on account of investment in new house property situated at \nLucknow without appreciating the fact that the assessee had ownership of more than \ntwo house property, other than the new investment in house property situated at \nLucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section 54F

PREM MANOHAR GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KANPUR

In the result, appeal in I

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

disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) on the basis that no notice for enhancement was given to the assessee. In this respect we find that section 251 deals with the powers of CIT(A) whereby he can allow the appeal or can enhance the appeal or can annul the assessment. However, sub clause (2) of section 251 states that

PREM MANOHAR GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KANPUR

In the result, appeal in I

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

disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) on the basis that no notice for enhancement was given to the assessee. In this respect we find that section 251 deals with the powers of CIT(A) whereby he can allow the appeal or can enhance the appeal or can annul the assessment. However, sub clause (2) of section 251 states that

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new house property situated at\nLucknow, without appreciating that the assessee had owned property more than\nthree house property other ling the new investment in house property situated at\nLucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section 54F

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new property situated at\nLucknow without appreciating that the assessee had owned property more than\n7 house property situated at Lucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section 54F

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA UP

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new property situated at\nLucknow without appreciating the fact that the assessee had ownership of more than\nfive properties, other than the new investment in property situated at\nLucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section 54F

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA UP

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new house property situated at\nLucknow without appreciating the fact that the assessee had owned property more than\n10 years, property other than giving new investment in the property suted at\nLucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section

SMT. MEENU MALHOTRA,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 2(2), KANPUR

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

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 10.03.2016 which order is bad in law and be quashed. 2. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the disallowance of Rs.23,59,223/- earned on account of long term capital gains, invested in purchase of residential house claimed exempt u/s.54F, without any basis

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

Disallowance of claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Act – Rs. 68,98,817/- That in the relevant year assessee has sold residential land measuring 300 sq. mtr. on 20.05.2020, part of 447/2, Chawni Bazar (Civil Lines), Pargana- Tehsil, Gonda for consideration of Rs. 9,00,000/- Stamp Duty value Rs. 82,35,000/- to his son AlokPandey (PAN-CZZPP5325B). Considering

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Disallowance of claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Act – Rs. 68,98,817/- That in the relevant year assessee has sold residential land measuring 300 sq. mtr. on 20.05.2020, part of 447/2, Chawni Bazar (Civil Lines), Pargana- Tehsil, Gonda for consideration of Rs. 9,00,000/- Stamp Duty value Rs. 82,35,000/- to his son AlokPandey (PAN-CZZPP5325B). Considering

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

Disallowance of claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Act – Rs. 68,98,817/- That in the relevant year assessee has sold residential land measuring 300 sq. mtr. on 20.05.2020, part of 447/2, Chawni Bazar (Civil Lines), Pargana- Tehsil, Gonda for consideration of Rs. 9,00,000/- Stamp Duty value Rs. 82,35,000/- to his son AlokPandey (PAN-CZZPP5325B). Considering