SHIMLA PROPERTIES,LUCKNOW vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2012-13 Shimla Properties V. The Pcit 30C, Datiya House Lucknow Khursheed Bagh Lucknow Tan/Pan:Ablfs9732M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16 08 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01 09 2022 O R D E R

House Property, short term capital gain and Income from other sources, got accepted by the Department; that subsequently, re-assessment proceedings were initiated to tax the statedly escaped income of Rs.6,64,000/- derived from sale of shares of M/s NYSSA Corporation Ltd. and the reassessment proceedings were completed vide order dated 27.12.2019, making an addition

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

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

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

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

RAVI SHANKAR DUBEY,LUCKNOW vs. D CIY RANGE-3, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

addition under the head "income from house property" in respect of same property on which interest was paid by the appellant

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

houses is not. The submissions discussing judicial precedents on this issue and on the applicability /inapplicability of the decisions of jurisdictional High Court are annexed. REVENUE’S SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL 1. Revenue filed additional grounds of appeal for all these years on 05.02.2020 raising the failure of the CIT(A) to consider provisions contained

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

Property Stock" as represented by Houses constructed by the "Appellant" (excluding the cost of land) as charged to the Income and Expenditure Account was liable to be allowed as deduction even in Cash System of Accounting and the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified either on facts or in law in confirming the addition

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

Property Stock" as represented by Houses constructed by the "Appellant" (excluding the cost of land) as charged to the Income and Expenditure Account was liable to be allowed as deduction even in Cash System of Accounting and the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified either on facts or in law in confirming the addition

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

Property Stock" as represented by Houses constructed by the "Appellant" (excluding the cost of land) as charged to the Income and Expenditure Account was liable to be allowed as deduction even in Cash System of Accounting and the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified either on facts or in law in confirming the addition

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

addition of Rs.37,00,000/- 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 \nof Income

SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINGH ,HARDOI vs. ITO-3(2),HARDOI-1, HARDOI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshrait(Ss) A. Nos. 795 To 798/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shailendra Kumar Singh Ito-3(2) V. Subhan Khera Sandila, Hardoi- Hardoi-1 241305. Uttar Pradesh-241305. Pan:Cvqps4275L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By: Shri Naeem Khan, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

Income from House Property’. In support of this assertion, am Interest Certificate has been included. d) Disallowance of Rs 30,614/was made on account of disallowance of deduction under chapter V1-A Actual Facts: The claim referenced above is valid, and supporting documentation has been included for your reference, e) An addition

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

additional income is offered to cover deficiencies in records for \nrelevant year and preceding years and to cover unproven sundry \ncreditors/remission of liabilities, apart from investment in properties. \nFurther, no adverse inference may be drawn w.r.t. extra profits and seized \ndocuments for years prior to AY 2021-22.\nFurther, at the time of the search proceeding