ITAT Allahabad Judgments — January 2025

The Tribunal held that the Infrastructure Development and Reserve Fund is the fund of the assessee authority and liable to be considered in its hands. However, the matter was restored to the AO to analyze the nature of receipts with reference to the OM dated 15.01.1998 to determine the quantum to be routed through the Income and Expenditure account.

The Tribunal held that the Infrastructure Development and Reserve Fund is the fund of the assessee authority and liable to be considered in its hands. However, the matter was restored to the AO to analyze the nature of receipts with reference to the OM dated 15.01.1998 to determine the quantum to be routed through the Income and Expenditure account.

The Tribunal held that the Infrastructure Development and Reserve Fund is the fund of the assessee authority and liable to be considered in its hands. However, the matter was restored to the AO to analyze the nature of receipts with reference to the OM dated 15.01.1998 to determine the quantum to be routed through the Income and Expenditure account.

The Tribunal held that the Delhi benches lacked territorial jurisdiction because the Assessing Officers' offices were not located within Delhi. The appeals were dismissed on this ground.

The ITAT found that both the AO and CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders without affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present its case. It emphasized the CIT(A)'s statutory duty under section 250(6) to pass a speaking order on the merits of the appeal. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment in accordance with law, ensuring reasonable opportunity to the assessee.