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

deduction claimed u/s \n54F of the Act, on account of investment in new house property situated at \nLucknow without appreciating

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 and deductions claimed against it, had been filed either during the assessment proceedings, or during the revisionary proceedings

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

deduction claimed u/s \n54F of the Act, on account of investment in new house property situated at \nLucknow without appreciating

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

house property" in respect of same property on which interest was paid by the appellant for purchase thereof and has been not allowed as a deduction

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

deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act against the investment made in house property situated at 57, Laxmanpuri, Indira

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

deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act against the investment made in house property situated at 57, Laxmanpuri, Indira

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

deduction u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act against the investment made in house property situated at 57, Laxmanpuri, Indira

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

deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new house property situated at\nLucknow, without

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

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

MR.BHUPENDRA KUMAR TIWARI,GONDA vs. ITO-6(1), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa.Ys. 2021-22 Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tiwari, Vs. Ito, P.S. Bhitaree-1, Wazirganj, Ward 6(1) Distt. Gonda Lucknow Pan Agmpt 0366J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2024 O R D E R

house property Rs.92,447/-, also disallowed deduction under Chapter VI-A Rs.1,50,000/- and also addition of cash deposited

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

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

House Property’. In support of this assertion, an Interest Certificate has been included. ITA Nos. 795 to 798/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 9 d) Disallowance of Rs 30,614/was made on account of disallowance of deduction

SHRI VINEET MEHROTRA,HARDOI vs. I.T.O.-1(5), SHAHJAHANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

deduction u/s 57 of the Act. The Assessing Officer held that the claim of the assessee that property was owned by other family members was not substantiated and therefore, he assessed the income as ‘income from house

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

deduction u/s\n54F of the Income Tax Act against the investment made in house property\nsituated at 57, Laxmanpuri, Indira

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

deduction claimed u/s\n54F of the Act, 1961 on account of investment in new house property situated at\nLucknow without

SHRI KINGSHUK GHOSHAL,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-6(5), LUCKNOW

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Kinghshuk Ghoshal V. The Ito 6(5) E-402, Halwasiya Utsav Enclave Lucknow Opposite Hal, Faizabad Road Lucknow Tan/Pan:Affpg3258L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Order Dated 26.12.2017, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Lucknow-3 (Ld. Cit(A)) For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.11.2012, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,05,233/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Noticed That The Assessee Was Earning Interest Income From Saving Bank Deposits & Fdrs & That The Assessee Had Claimed Exemption Of Rs.71,54,619/- Under Section 54 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’). During The

house property and such investment was partly made and, therefore, the assessee can be said to have complied with the substantive provision as enshrined under section 54(1) of the Act. I am, therefore, of the considered view that that the Ld. First Appellate Authority was not justified in confirming the order of the AO denying grant of deduction

SHYAM SUNDER GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

House Property and other source income. The business activities\ncarried out by the assessee remained identical as to those in several\npreceding year and were operated and controlled from the following\nplaces;\n(a) 74/02, Collectorganj. (Office)\n(b) J-9, Site-3, Panki Industrial Area, Kanpur (Godown)\nFollowing grounds have been raised:-\n1. That the assessment famed u/s.143

FIROJ AHMAD ,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-1(4), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2017-18 Firoz Ahmad Income Tax Officer-1(4) V. B-1174, Indira Nagar, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226016. Lucknow-226001. Pan:Adypa2072K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None (Adj. Application Filed) Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 14 11 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 26 11 2024 O R D E R

deduction as claimed in the grounds of appeal. 5. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on records. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) as decided the appeal without adverting to the grounds taken by the assessee. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: - “5.2 I have perused the appellant

REKHA BAJPAI,LUCKNOW vs. NFAC, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2020-21 Rekha Bajpai V. Assessment Unit 551-Chh/122-A Income Tax Department New Sardari Khera National Faceless Alambagh, Lucknow Assessment Centre Tan/Pan:Aevpb7662Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None (Adjournment Application) Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 05 12 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 12 2024 O R D E R

house property. 4. Variation in respect interest 14,33,495/- claimed against CC Limit account. 5. Variation in respect License Fee. 22,00,000/- 6. Variation in respect deduction