Nivedita Mahila Gramin Bigar Shetaki Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Navargaon vs. Pr. CIT -3, Nagpur
The appeals of the appellant are allowed in terms of aforesaid observation
ITA 123/NAG/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2013-2014
Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 123/Nag/2018 & 107/Nag/2019 आयकर िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 M/S Nivedita Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Maryadit Dr Hedgewar Chowk, Navargaon, Shindewahi, Chandrapur – 441 223(Mh) Pan : Aaaan 3421 D . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur – 440 001 (Mh) . . . . . . . ""यथ" / Respondent }Kjk / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Loya Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 15/02/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull, Am; Against The Revisionary Orders Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Nagpur [For Short “Pcit”] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Sprung Out Of Regular Orders Of Assessments Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, By The Income Tax Officer-Ward-3, Nagpur [For Shot “Ao”], The Appellant Assessee Filed These Appeals Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [For Short “Tribunal”] U/S 253 Of The Act.
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263Section 80P
…even-handed conclusions assessments allowing deduction u/s 80P were carried out, leaving no air in assessments. 9.6 In this context it is apt to quote the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of “CIT vs Mehrotra Brothers” reported at 270 ITR 157 (MP), the Lordship relying on “CIT Vs Ratlam Coal Ash Co.” reported in 171 ITR 141, had held that when the AO considered the records before him and completed the assessment after considering the evidence filed and after his satisfaction about the genuineness of claim, the order of revision under Section 263 on the vague ground that the AO did not…
