A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S VANDANA JAIN & RAMA BANSAL, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain under section 10(38) the following conditions are required to be fulfilled by the assessee: 1. That the capital assets must have been held by the assessee in term of law. 2. There has been transfer or sale of capital assets as define u/s 2(47) of the Act. 3. The assessee had paid the STT on the transfer

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SUNIL KUMAR MITTAL & MAMTA MITTAL, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain under section 10(38) the following conditions are required to be fulfilled by the assessee: 1. That the capital assets must have been held by the assessee in term of law. 2. There has been transfer or sale of capital assets as define u/s 2(47) of the Act. 3. The assessee had paid the STT on the transfer

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S RAKESH SHIVHARE & NISHA MITTAL, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain under section 10(38) the following conditions are required to be fulfilled by the assessee: 1. That the capital assets must have been held by the assessee in term of law. 2. There has been transfer or sale of capital assets as define u/s 2(47) of the Act. 3. The assessee had paid the STT on the transfer

M/S CHATTA SUGAR CO. LTD,MATHURA vs. A.C.I..T CIRCLE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

gains under Case I of Schedule D". 5.3 Thus, when subsidy is received from a public fund and these are to assist the assessee to carry on or business, the object of subsidy is apparent i.e. to enable the assessee to run business more profitably, become more competitive etc. These are operational subsidies and not capital subsidies. The source from

YOGENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) GWL, GWALIOR

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 50(C) of the Income Tax Act. The addition made, computing the long term capital gain by the AO, sustained by the NFAC is liable to be deleted." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for the impugned assessment year ,on 02.08.2017 , declaring total income of Rs. Nil. Return was processed

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Gains of business or Profession” or “ Income from other & 355/Agra/2014 & SA Nos. 1 to 3/Ag/2017 7 (In ITA Nos. 149 to 151/Agra/2017) sources”. The completion of assessment under Chapter IV and invoking provisions of section 145(3) is wholly illegal in the case of the appellant which is enjoying registration u/s 12A. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Gains of business or Profession” or “ Income from other & 355/Agra/2014 & SA Nos. 1 to 3/Ag/2017 7 (In ITA Nos. 149 to 151/Agra/2017) sources”. The completion of assessment under Chapter IV and invoking provisions of section 145(3) is wholly illegal in the case of the appellant which is enjoying registration u/s 12A. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Gains of business or Profession” or “ Income from other & 355/Agra/2014 & SA Nos. 1 to 3/Ag/2017 7 (In ITA Nos. 149 to 151/Agra/2017) sources”. The completion of assessment under Chapter IV and invoking provisions of section 145(3) is wholly illegal in the case of the appellant which is enjoying registration u/s 12A. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Section 10(23C) on the requirement that a college must maintain the status- quo, as it were, in regard to its knowledge based infrastructure. Nor for that matter is an educational institution prohibited from upgrading its infrastructure on educational facilities save on the pain of losing the benefit of the exemption under Section 10(23C). Imposing such a condition which

GIREESH CHANDRA,ETAH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), ETAH, ETAH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

49,800/-. 3. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal for want of details of improvement in property and other supporting documents to justify his claim. In such circumstances, learned CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer, vide assessment order dated 19.11.2018. 4. Assessee preferred this second appeal

SHRI DAUJI RAM ,ALIGARH vs. ITO 1(4), ALIGARH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2012-13

1(4), Aligarh. Mathura Road, Aligarh. PAN : DKKPB1758R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 13.02.2025 Date of pronouncement 13.02.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Aligarh’s order in appeal no. 116/2017-18/Aligarh dated

KISHOR KUMAR GARG,JOURA ROAD, MORENA vs. ACIT, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshkishor Kumar Garg, Vs. Acit, Joura Road, Morena, Gwalior, Circle-3(1), Mp Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Acopg5428J Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

capital gains. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2019 determining the total income at ₹49,18,900/-. In the said assessment, the ad hoc disallowances @10% of repairs to machinery and compensation to employees were made as under: – Repairs of machinery Rs.5,06,892/- Compensation to Employees Rs.7,89,000/- Total

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), GWALIOR vs. SHRI SANDEEP TAORI, GWALIOR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

1) Vs. Shri Sandeep Taori Aayakar Bhawan, 106, Deepa Laxmi City Centre, Gwalior Kherapanti Colony, Gwalior-474001 /""""""""./PAN/GIR No: AAOPT7924N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT, DR Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, CA Date of Hearing 12.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.02.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year