Loading ITAT cases…
316 orders · Page 6 of 7
The Tribunal restored the issue of registration back to the CIT(Exemptions) for de novo consideration. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case forthwith.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's plea to substantiate the genuineness of its activities and set aside the impugned orders. The matter was restored to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal, adhering to principles of natural justice, allowed the assessee's prayer. The issue of registration was restored to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh consideration, with the assessee directed to prove its case.
The Tribunal found that in the interest of justice, the assessee deserved one more opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.
The Tribunal, considering the principle of natural justice, condoned the delay in filing the first appeal. The matter was restored back to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment.
The Tribunal, adhering to principles of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity. The case was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, with the direction for the assessee to submit all necessary documents and prove their case.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's plea to substantiate the genuineness of its activities and set aside the impugned orders. The matter was restored to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the Pr. CIT's revisionary order was unsustainable as the AO had conducted adequate inquiries during the assessment proceedings. The assessee's reconciliation of the purchase discrepancy was also not found to be erroneous.
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide specific particulars and documentary evidence to substantiate the reasons for the extraordinary delay. Vague and general assertions were deemed insufficient to establish 'sufficient cause'.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's prayer to restore the matter to the lower authorities for a de novo assessment, citing principles of natural justice. This was subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 4,000/-.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) did not make conclusive findings on the trust's objects or activities, and the rejection was primarily due to non-compliance. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, restoring the applications back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case. The decision was based on principles of natural justice and the assessee being a charitable trust.
The Tribunal found that in the interest of justice, the assessee deserved one more opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's activities, including medical care and professional training, were charitable in nature and provided to all irrespective of caste, creed, or religion. Therefore, the assessee was entitled to both registration as a religious cum charitable entity and approval under Section 80G.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders, restoring the appeals to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case, and the issue of delay was not to be raised.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders, restoring the appeals to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case, and the issue of delay was not to be raised.
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide specific particulars and documentary evidence to substantiate the reasons for the extraordinary delay. Vague and general assertions were deemed insufficient to establish 'sufficient cause'.
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by restricting the addition on bogus purchases to 10% and deleted the disallowance for cash payments. The disallowance for travelling expenses was upheld.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity to be heard. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored for de-novo adjudication.
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. This was done to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard, adhering to the principles of natural justice, despite the assessee's failure to diligently prosecute its case.
The tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the AO for de-novo assessment. The assessee was directed to present its case and prove its claims.
The Tribunal directed the AO to verify the payments made and restrict the disallowance only to amounts paid after the due dates, as some payments might have been made within the due dates but wrongly reported.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, directing the assessee to present its case.
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to decide the appeal on its merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, restoring the registration applications to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to present and prove its case promptly.
The tribunal held that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) to provide a hearing and allow the assessee to submit necessary documents.
The Tribunal restored the issue of registration back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, allowing the assessee to plead and prove its case. This was done in the interest of natural justice.
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, restoring the registration applications to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case effectively.
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and restored the issue of registration back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case forthwith.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue did not oppose this request.
The tribunal, adhering to principles of natural justice, allowed the assessee's prayer. The issue of registration was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, with a direction for the assessee to prove its case.
The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, allowed the assessee's prayer for a fresh hearing. The issue of registration was restored to the CIT(E) for de novo consideration.
The Tribunal held that the interest accrued on grants was incidental to the grants themselves and should bear the same character. Therefore, the assessee was considered wholly financed by the government, satisfying the conditions for exemption.
The Tribunal held that the interest accrued on grants was incidental to the grants themselves and should bear the same character. Therefore, the assessee was considered wholly financed by the government, satisfying the conditions for exemption.
The ITAT admitted the assessee's appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 3,000/- to be deposited within 30 days. The AO is directed to proceed with a de novo assessment.
The Tribunal condoned the delay, subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the appeal de novo on merits.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, admitted the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, directing the assessee to present its case.
The ITAT set aside the orders of the CIT(A) due to violation of natural justice and non-speaking orders. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is mandated to pass a speaking and reasoned order on merits, even in ex-parte proceedings. The assessee should not be deprived of the right of appeal due to procedural lapses if not deliberate. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity for a de novo assessment. This was subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 3,000 to a specified charitable fund.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has a statutory obligation to adjudicate grounds of appeal on merits. Since the issues involved factual and legal aspects requiring examination, the ex-parte order was set aside.
The Tribunal, adhering to principles of natural justice, allowed the assessee's prayer. The issue of registration was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, with a direction for the assessee to prove its case.
The Tribunal, considering principles of natural justice, set aside the impugned orders and restored the matters to the AO for de novo assessment. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment, directing the assessee to prove its case.
The ITAT set aside the orders of the CIT(A) due to violation of natural justice and non-speaking orders. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal subject to a cost of Rs. 5000/-. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present their case and evidence.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case.
The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to present its case.
The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity for a hearing before the lower authorities. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored for de-novo adjudication.
The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, allowed the assessee another opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities. This is subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 10,000/-.