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)

trust. It was submitted that the applicant had applied for its notification under section 10(46) of the Act, on 11.2.2019. Further Greater NOIDA Industrial Development authority had beennotified10(46) of the Central Government act for the activities which are similar in nature that of assessee vide notification dated 23.6. 2020. The ld AR prayed that suitable direction be issued

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

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

trust attracted the proviso to section 2(15) and hence these were not for 'charitable purpose' and fur this reason provisions of section 13(8) of the I.T.Act are clearly attracted. (ii) That, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law in directing to exclude Rs.17,56,27.767/- from the amount of Rs.42,24,51,350/- by ignoring the provisions

BUNDELKHAND GRAMOTTHAN EVAM SHAIKCHHIK VIKAS SAMITI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD EXEMPTION, AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2021-22

54 of the paper book, wherein it was rectified and certified form-10B was filed on 21.05.2024. He submitted that the learned CIT(A) has rejected the claim of the assessee on the basis that Form-10B was not filed on time by referring to Rule 12(2) of the Income-tax Rules. In this regard, he submitted that

HARDAYAL CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD vs. ITO (EXP) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

54,80,590/- (Rs.2,30,00,000/- - Rs.1,75,19,408/-, which was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Agra vide order dated 28.02.2017. The appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 245 & 246/Agr/2017 on low tax effect (not exceeding

ITO EXMP, AGRA vs. HARDAYAL CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

54,80,590/- (Rs.2,30,00,000/- - Rs.1,75,19,408/-, which was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Agra vide order dated 28.02.2017. The appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 245 & 246/Agr/2017 on low tax effect (not exceeding

STATE BANK OF INDIA,VRINDAVAN vs. CIT APPEALS 1, AGRA

In the result, ITA No. 65/Agra/2017 is allowed, whereas ITA

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

charitable organization having section 12AA and section 80G registration and hence not liable to pay tax, and so it should not be treated as an assessee in default. Many I.T.A Nos. 65& 66/Agra/2017 6 judicial precedents have been cited by the appellant in support of each of the above arguments. It is important to note that the appellant's default

ACIT-CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. PUNEET AGARWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) CO Nos.04, 03 & 05/Agr/2025 iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) 41. Further he brought to our notice the retraction letter submitted by the assessee. He submitted that the reasons recorded are vague and it clearly shows that

VISHWAMBHAR DAYAL AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) CO Nos.04, 03 & 05/Agr/2025 iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) 41. Further he brought to our notice the retraction letter submitted by the assessee. He submitted that the reasons recorded are vague and it clearly shows that

ACIT-CIRCEL-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. MAYANK AGRAWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) CO Nos.04, 03 & 05/Agr/2025 iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) 41. Further he brought to our notice the retraction letter submitted by the assessee. He submitted that the reasons recorded are vague and it clearly shows that

DCIT EXMP.CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. BIRLA JAN SEWA TRUST, GWALIOR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13

charitable trust registered since 21.11.1977 and is running medical institution (hospital) and also in the imparting of education. The assesses trust besides have registered u/s 12AA of the Act was also approved u/s 10(23C)(via) of the Act. The assessee trust is running the hospital in the name of BIMR Hospital and BIMR Heart Centre. The assessee had filed