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)

section 2(15) of the I. T. Act, as amended from 01.04.2009. Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant is carrying on non commercial activities for which registration u/s 12A had been granted. The authorities below could not legally hold the charitable objects as of commercial nature during the subsistence of registration u/s 12A in view of authoritative

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

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

disallowed by the assessing officer. The authorities below have arbitrarily rejected the supporting evidence. The finding of Ld. CIT(A) in holding the expenses as of capital nature and allowing depreciation thereon is wholly illegal. The addition is wholly illegal which may kindly be directed to be deleted. 28. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both

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

disallowing the amount based on Form-10B. 4. Aggrieved, assessee filed a rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act and the same was denied. 5. It was brought to my notice that while certifying the Form-10B, the auditor of assessee has, by mistake, filled column -3 row 3 as zero instead of Rs.14,84,424/-. He brought

LAXMI FOUNDATION,FIROZABAD vs. ITO EXEMPTION AGRA (CPC) , AGRA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It transpires at the outset that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s claim of section 11 exemption; in the course of section 143(1) processing dated 20.03.2020 as upheld in the impugned lower appellate discussion reading as follows : “5. Decision: After carefully going through

KANHA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GWALIOR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

section 2(15) of the Act and not for the purposes of profit. The aggregate receipts of the assessee society for the year under consideration do not exceed Rs. one crore. Assessee filed ITR-7 along with Form-10B for A.Y. 2018-19 on 09.10.2018, declaring nil income. CPC, Bangalore, vide, communication dated 04.12.2019, intimated the appellant assessee

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WELFARE SANSTHAN,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD,4(1)(3) ALIGARH, ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 3. Learned counsel at the outset invites our attention to the assessee’s identical withdrawal applications dated 16.01.2025 in the instant three appeals reading as under: “2) The assessee has filed its return of income claiming exemption

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WALFARE SANSTHAN ,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 3. Learned counsel at the outset invites our attention to the assessee’s identical withdrawal applications dated 16.01.2025 in the instant three appeals reading as under: “2) The assessee has filed its return of income claiming exemption

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WELFARE SANSTHAN,ALIGARH vs. ITO, WARD, 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 3. Learned counsel at the outset invites our attention to the assessee’s identical withdrawal applications dated 16.01.2025 in the instant three appeals reading as under: “2) The assessee has filed its return of income claiming exemption