FATEH CHAND CHARITABLE TRUST,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ADDL. CIT, MEERUT

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

5 of 27 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of ITO vs. M/s Sanathan Dharam Shiksha Samiti, Hisar passed in ITA No. 3266 to 3269/Del/2011 (Ayrs. 2005-06 to 2008-09) wherein the Tribunal has allowed all the four appeals of the Department

ADIT (E), DELHI vs. M/S ASIAN CENTRE FOR ORGANISATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

147 centre round the impugned professional receipts, which led the AO to form a belief of escapement of income and gave birth to all the subsequent objections of the AO. However, the reassessment order made by AO reveals that no addition towards professional receipts has been made by the AO, which itself leads to hold the reason to believe

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. RITES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

RITES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

COMPAREX INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

80G amounting to INR 15,14,475/- already claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income. Interest and Penalty Grounds: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in levying interest under sections 234B and 234C of the Act in the final assessment order passed for relevant

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. JAKSON LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

80G of the Act in respect of the Anugrah Foundation despite noting that there were discrepancies in the receipt of donation. (5) 5. The appellant craves to add or amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the hearing of the appeal.” 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “ (a) That on the facts

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. JAKSON LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

80G of the Act in respect of the Anugrah Foundation despite noting that there were discrepancies in the receipt of donation. (5) 5. The appellant craves to add or amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the hearing of the appeal.” 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “ (a) That on the facts

JAKSON LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-4, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

80G of the Act in respect of the Anugrah Foundation despite noting that there were discrepancies in the receipt of donation. (5) 5. The appellant craves to add or amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the hearing of the appeal.” 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “ (a) That on the facts

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306 ITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising additional ground of appeal qua treatment of sales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

SHREE CHANDI MAA MAHAKALI PRACHIN MANDIR SIDH PEETH SAMITI,SONIPAT vs. CPC, BANGLORE

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

reassessment. In our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also equivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for example, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the intimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant times. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of Jindal

BRIJBASI EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, NEW DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

80G thereof. The Appellant filed its return of income on 14th September, 2006 declaring nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny, and pursuant thereto, an Assessment Order under section 143(3) was passed on 15th December 2008. The Assessee preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] who confirmed the same vide