Search: house property

44 results for “house property”+ Section 73clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 1165 Section 2(15)40 Section 12A35 Addition to Income24 Section 6923 Exemption23 Section 143(3)20 Survey u/s 133A17 Section 1516

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

house property situated at\nLucknow at the time of transfer of property that violates the provisions of section 54F\nof Income Tax Act, 1961.\n\nI.T.A. No.608/Lkw/2024, A.Y. 2020-21 (Revenue’s Appeal)\n\n4. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in\ndeleting the addition of Rs.1,74,492/- on account

SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, NFAC

ITA 400/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Santosh Kumar Shukla V. The Assessment Unit 11A/141, Vrindavan Colony Nfac Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Bawps5372J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shalabh Singh, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.03.2025 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Was An Employee Of Planning Research & Action Division Of State Planning Institute, Since 1993. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice Under Section 148A(B) Of The Act, Vide Dated 16.03.2022 For The Reason That The Assessee Had Made Cash Deposits/Time Deposits In His Bank Account. In Response To Notice Under Section Under Section 148 Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.04.2022, Declaring A Total Income Of

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

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

SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, NFAC

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

SANTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, NFAC

M/S. NARAIN PROPERTIES LIMITED,KANPUR vs. ACIT-VI, KANPUR

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW