M/S SUSHILA DEVI CENTRE FOR PROFESSIONAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH,DEHRADUN vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), KANPUR (JAO- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

12A on that date for grant of registration.\n14.4 However, as far as provision of cancellation of the registration provided by sub-\nsection (4) of section 12AA is concerned, sub-section (4) of section 12AB brings into\nplace a completely new self-contained procedural code for conducting inquiry about\n'specified violations', cancelling registration or refusing to cancel registration.\n14.5

K L D A V COLLEGE,ROORKEE, HARIDWAR vs. ITO WARD 1(3)(4), ROORKEE, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

b) of the Income Tax Act 1961 and treating the gross receipts as Income without allowing revenue expenditures and depreciation on capital expenditures. 7. Without prejudice to the above the ADDL/JCIT has erred in law and facts in sustaining the addition for Rs. 1,82,59,837/- and Tax liability including interest and additional Income Tax at Rs. 1

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

b) of the Act read with Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there was no time limit prescribed for filing the ITR and the audit report in Form 10B. The Ld. AR further submitted that the section 12(1

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

b) of the Act read with Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there was no time limit prescribed for filing the ITR and the audit report in Form 10B. The Ld. AR further submitted that the section 12(1

CHAUDHARY HARCHAND SINGH ATMA RAM EDUCATION TRUST,ROORKEE vs. CIT(E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No.6240/Del./2017: Asstt. Year: 2016-17 Chaudhary Harchand Singh Atma Vs Cit(E), Ram Education Trust, Lucknow C/O. Parikshit Aggarwal Fca, House No. 1238, Sec-22B, Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc2457J Assessee By : Sh. None Revenue By : Smt. Mayank Prabha Tomar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2022

Trust, Lucknow C/o. Parikshit Aggarwal FCA, House No. 1238, Sec-22B, Chandigarh (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABTC2457J Assessee by : Sh. None Revenue by : Smt. Mayank Prabha Tomar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 14.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 16.12.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order