ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in which there is a provision for charging tax if total receipt of entities engaged in advancement of general public utility exceeds Rs. 25 lakhs, and deleting the addition of Rs.5,11,38,89,559/- made on account of various disallowances

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

disallowed the accumulation of Rs.\n22,00,00,000/- under section 11(2) of the Act and furthermore added back

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee is held to be partly allowed

section 8(2) of the Interest Tax Act, 1974 disallowing the exemption\nclaimed by the assessee under the Interest Tax Act and made

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

section 8(2) of the Interest Tax Act, 1974 disallowing the exemption A.Ys. 1995-96 & 1996-97 M/s U.P. State

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

disallowing the assessee the benefit of section 11. However, the ld. AO concluded from the claim of deduction under section 80IB, that the assessee was engaged in business activity and therefore, on these grounds, he held that the exemption under section 11 was not allowable. He also held that the claim of section 80IB was also not allowable firstly because

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2016 made an addition of business profit at Rs.3,32,79,731/-. Further, the Assessing Authority disallowed

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2016 made an addition of business profit at Rs.3,32,79,731/-. Further, the Assessing Authority disallowed

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2016 made an addition of business profit at Rs.3,32,79,731/-. Further, the Assessing Authority disallowed

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-APPEAL, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 01.04.2016 made an addition of business profit at Rs.3,32,79,731/-. Further, the Assessing Authority disallowed

LUCKNOW EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,LUCKNOW vs. I.T.O., LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

section 2(15) of the Income- tax Act. I.T.A. Nos.185,186,163,164,439/Lkw/2019 3 4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in disallowing

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

section 2(15) of the Income- tax Act. I.T.A. Nos.185,186,163,164,439/Lkw/2019 3 4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in disallowing