M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

u/s 133A of the IT Act to find out the true facts of the case when there was no compliance and cooperation on the part of the assessee to prove its primary onus. And on the basis of survey only true facts of the case were ascertained which helped in ascertaining the factual reality. The assessing office collected information u/s

D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

10B (page no. 50 & 51 of the paperbook) dated 29.09.2015 and as per the same, deposited the above said amount in a Scheduled Bank, thereby complying to the provisions of the section 11(2) of the Act. If the Assessing Officer wanted further specifics of the amount set apart, she could have asked for the same during the assessment proceedings

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

10B (page no. 50 & 51 of the paperbook) dated 29.09.2015 and as per the same, deposited the above said amount in a Scheduled Bank, thereby complying to the provisions of the section 11(2) of the Act. If the Assessing Officer wanted further specifics of the amount set apart, she could have asked for the same during the assessment proceedings