JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

4. That the documents, explanations filed by the Appellant, and the material available on record have not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and have been wrongly ignored. 5. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has .erred in law and on facts in charging the interest under Sections 234A, 234B, & 234C

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

4. That the documents, explanations filed by the Appellant, and the material available on record have not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and have been wrongly ignored. 5. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has .erred in law and on facts in charging the interest under Sections 234A, 234B, & 234C

SHRI BACHANU RAM,,MIRZAPUR vs. ITO,, MIRZAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee with tribunal in ITA No

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Sri Bachanu Ram, V. Ito, Range – Iii(1), Mirzapur, Saketpuri Colony, Sabri, U.P. Mirzapur,U.P. Pan: Beqps 3977 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 by issue of notice u/s 148 is not a judicious act on the part of department hence the entire action is bad in law. 4. That in any view of the matter in compliance to notice u/s 148 no return was filed but return filed subsequently in compliance to notice u/s 142(1) hence the mandatory requirement of service