ITAT Jaipur Judgments — December 2021

The Tribunal held that the show cause notice for penalty was defective as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had offered a possible explanation which was rejected without proper examination, and no mens rea was proven.

The Tribunal upheld the Pr.CIT's order, finding that the assessee society's activities were not genuine and not in accordance with its objects. The Tribunal also found that the provisions of Sections 11 & 12 did not apply due to the operation of Section 13(1). Consequently, the cancellation of registration was affirmed.

The Tribunal upheld the Pr.CIT's order, finding that the assessee society's activities were not genuine and not in accordance with its objects. The Tribunal also found that the provisions of Sections 11 & 12 did not apply due to the operation of Section 13(1). Consequently, the cancellation of registration was affirmed.

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not provided a reasonable opportunity to represent her case. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, the impugned order was set aside.

The Tribunal found that the AO had erroneously treated the assessee as an Association of Persons and had not properly considered the provisions of law. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh verification.

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity to represent her case. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, the impugned order was set aside.

The Tribunal held that where employee's contributions to PF/ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income, no disallowance can be made under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B. The amendments by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective and not applicable to the impugned assessment year.