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

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

The appeals of the department are dismissed

3) The provisions of sub-section (2) shall not apply if— (a) the house or part of the house is actually let during the whole or any part of the previous year; or (b) any other benefit therefrom is derived by the owner. (4) Where the property referred to in sub-section (2) consists of more than one house

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)

3 10A in accordance with the requirement of section 12A for grant of registration u/s 12A of the I.T. Act; that the C.I.T. has erred on facts and in law to reject the claim of grant of registration on mere presumption by making a remark "at this moment who is running the school is not clear", when sufficient material