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)

200/- as capital expenditure. The authorities below failed to appreciate that the equipments purchased had expectancy of life of less than a year and as such holding the expenditure of capital nature is wholly illegal. 10. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in sustaining the addition of Rs 38,586/-, being the expenses made

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

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

charitable. Honourable Supreme Court in (page 66 of compilation) Queens Educational Society ( arising out of order of Uttrakhand High Court) ITA No.216/Agr/2016, 183/Agr/2014,439/Agr/2015 & ITA No. 177/Agr/2014 47 and Pine Grove International Charitable Trust ( arising out of order of Punjab & Haryana High Court) Para 24. The view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has been followed by the Delhi

SHREE TEEKAM CHAND EDUCAQTIONAL &,AGRA vs. C.I.T.-I, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenashree Teekam Chand Educational Vs..Cit -1 & Charitable Trust Society Agra. 22, Nehru Nagar, Agra. Panno.Aakts2145Q (Assessee) (Revenue)

section 2(15), or that the affiliation granted by Central Board of Secondary Education Board vide letter CBSE/Afll./SL-01205-13-14/2013- 14 was not genuine, or the school building in which school is being run was not in existence, or that the school was run by G.D. Goenka, a separate entity; that the appellant is an independent trust with no interference

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S PREM MOTORS PVT LTD., GWALIOR

The appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable Trust (supra) the AO had incorrectly computed the market rent of the house and had added the difference between the market rent so calculated and rent which was being actually paid. The same result was reached in L. Bansidhar& Sons vs. CIT (1993) 109 CTR (Del) 62 : (1993) 201 ITR 655 (Del) where however it was clarified that