BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

24 results for “house property”+ Block Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,149Mumbai1,064Bangalore627Karnataka503Chennai267Jaipur205Kolkata204Hyderabad195Pune193Ahmedabad181Chandigarh133Surat66Raipur65Telangana64Indore63Visakhapatnam60Amritsar34Cochin33Rajkot29Agra26Nagpur26Cuttack25Lucknow24Guwahati24Calcutta21SC13Patna13Jodhpur6Allahabad5Rajasthan3Orissa2Punjab & Haryana2Ranchi2Varanasi2Jabalpur2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 158B18Section 145(3)17Addition to Income14Section 54F13Section 13212Section 153A12Section 132A12Section 41(1)8Section 2638

DCIT, RANGE-3, LUCKNOW vs. M/S WELLDONE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 406/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh.Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S Welldone Infrastructure Range-3, Lucknow Private Limited, Lucknow Pan:Aaacw6354Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. B.P. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Amit Singh Chauhan, Addl (Cit) & Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.04.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Lucknow Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) On 19.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Lucknow Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,26,72,571/- Without Appreciate The Fact That The Assessee Is Involved In The Business Of Developing Properties & Selling It & Is Earning Rental Income Which Is Incidental To The "Revenue From Business Operations" Of The Assessee. 2. Ld. Cit(A) Had Erred In Law & On Facts Ignoring The Fact That The Assessee, While Filing Original Return Of Income Had Itself Considered That Rental Are In The Nature Of Revenue From Business Operations.

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Singh Chauhan, Addl (CIT) & Sh
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 250

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

Disallowance8
House Property7
Deduction7

assesse company. The ld. Sr. DR also invited our attention to page 32 of the paper book filed by the ld. AR and pointed out that the rental income had been included under, “revenue from operations” by the assessee company. Therefore, when the assessee was incorporated with one of the objects of letting out of properties and had also included

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:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

house properties. The detail of compliance made during assessment proceeding is as under: AY 2014-15 Reply dt. Page of PB Description Remarks 11-05-2023 48 General 05-09-2023 49 General 08-02-2024 50-52 General Bank Statement, Turnover reconciliation 26-02-2024 SCN issued NP Rate applied @11% not mentioned

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

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

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

house properties. The detail of compliance made during assessment proceeding is as under: AY 2014-15 Reply dt. Page of PB Description Remarks 11-05-2023 48 General 05-09-2023 49 General 08-02-2024 50-52 General Bank Statement, Turnover reconciliation 26-02-2024 SCN issued NP Rate applied @11% not mentioned

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

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

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

house properties. The detail of compliance made during assessment proceeding is as under: AY 2014-15 Reply dt. Page of PB Description Remarks 11-05-2023 48 General 05-09-2023 49 General 08-02-2024 50-52 General Bank Statement, Turnover reconciliation 26-02-2024 SCN issued NP Rate applied @11% not mentioned

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

ITA 353/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2022-23
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21 \nRakesh Kumar Pandey, \nS/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey, \nVill-Devarda, Block-Belsar, \nGonda-271401 \nPAN:ATIPP6520B \n(Appellant) \nVs. A.C.I.T., \nCentral Circle-2, \nLucknow. \n(Respondent) \n\nRevenue by Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (D.R.) \nAssessee by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A. \nShri Reghunath Mishra, Advocate \n\nO R D E R \n\nPER ANADEE

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

ITA 347/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21 Rakesh Kumar Pandey, S/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey, Vill-Devarda, Block-Belsar, Gonda-271401 PAN:ATIPP6520B (Appellant) Vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-2, Lucknow. (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. (A) For the sake of convenience and brevity these appeals and Cross Objections (“COs” for short) pertaining to the same

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

ITA 348/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21\nRakesh Kumar Pandey,\nS/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey,\nVill-Devarda, Block-Belsar,\nGonda-271401\nPAN:ATIPP6520B\n(Appellant)\nVs. A.C.I.T.,\nCentral Circle-2,\nLucknow.\n(Respondent)\n\nRevenue by Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (D.R.)\nAssessee by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A.\nShri Reghunath Mishra, Advocate\n\nO R D E R\nPER ANADEE NATH

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 684/LKW/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 682/LKW/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 685/LKW/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 683/LKW/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 686/LKW/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

SHRI VINAY PRATAP SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 687/LKW/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

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

Section 132Section 132ASection 153CSection 158B

block period. 22. In Amandeep Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has categorically held that section 132A lays down that the first step is the making of a requisition for delivery of assets and that the second step is the compliance thereof by way of delivering the assets to the requisitioning authority. In that case, what

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

ITA 405/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2022-23
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69Section 69A

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21\nRakesh Kumar Pandey,\nS/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey,\nVill-Devarda, Block-Belsar,\nGonda-271401\nPAN:ATIPP6520B\n(Appellant)\nVs. A.C.I.T.,\nCentral Circle-2,\nLucknow.\n(Respondent)\nRevenue by Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (D.R.)\nAssessee by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A.\nShri Reghunath Mishra, Advocate\nO R D E R\nPER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

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

ITA 352/LKW/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21\nRakesh Kumar Pandey,\nS/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey,\nVill-Devarda, Block-Belsar,\nGonda-271401\nPAN:ATIPP6520B\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nA.C.I.T.,\nCentral Circle-2,\nLucknow.\n(Respondent)\n\nO R D E R\n\nPER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.\n(A) For the sake of convenience and brevity these appeals and Cross\nObjections

SUBHASH JAISWAL ASSOCIATES,BAREILLY vs. PCIT BAREILLY, BAREILLY

ITA 100/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 263

Housing Projects Ltd. ITA No.179/2011 HC of\nDelhi - Dt. of order 1.3.2012 343 ITR 329(Delhi)\nIn the present case, the findings recorded not gone into and has not given\nany by the Tribunal are correct as the CIT has reason for observing that\nthe order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous. The finding\nrecorded

NISHA FAZAL,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ITO-4(3), KANPUR-01

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 226/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Dec 2025AY 2012-13
Section 1Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

property situated at House No.\n170, Block – E, 2nd Scheme, Sujatganj, Kanpur Nagar, Sale amount\nof Rs.35,00,000/- instead of Rs.83,93,860/- (Market Value), dated\n30.01.2012, due to which that the Id. ITO-1(5), Kanpur has recorded\nthe reasons and issued notice u/s 148 after obtained approval of Id.\nPr. CIT-1, Kanpur. Copy of sale deed

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

ITA 399/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69

Assessment year:2021-22 & 20-21\nRakesh Kumar Pandey,\nS/o Shri Surya Narayan Pandey,\nVill-Devarda, Block-Belsar,\nGonda-271401\nPAN:ATIPP6520B\n(Appellant)\nVs. A.C.I.T.,\nCentral Circle-2,\nLucknow.\n(Respondent)\nRevenue by Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (D.R.)\nAssessee by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A.\nShri Reghunath Mishra, Advocate\nO R D E R\nPER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

KASHMIRI LAL,KANPUR vs. ITO WARD-2(2), KANPUR

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

ITA 293/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Kashmiri Lal V. The Ito 126/33, Block Q Ward 2(2) Govind Nagar Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Asarpl8577C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None (Adjournment Application) Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 08 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54F

Block Q Ward 2(2) Govind Nagar Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:ASARPL8577C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None (Adjournment Application) Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date of hearing: 23 07 2024 Date of pronouncement: 30 08 2024 O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.2.2024, passed by the Addl./JCIT

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

assessment proceedings. We find that in the order dated 06/04/2022, in the case of the assessee itself for earlier years, similar findings of learned CIT(A) were upheld and the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed. For the sake of completeness, the detailed findings of the Tribunal contained in para 9 and 10 are reproduced below: 9. Now coming