DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, , NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCITACIT CIRCLE-3 , NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3,61,414, on account of Professional Tax. The total disallowance made under section 43B(a) of the Act by the Assessing Officer comes to ` 30,41,235, which was also added back to the income of the assessee and tax accordingly. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) observed that there is a substantial delay of 705 days

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

disallowance whatsoever is made in the same. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for conducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is completed and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the time of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

disallowance whatsoever is made in the\nsame. Further, no notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued for\nconducting assessment. In view of above, assessment of the appellant is\ncompleted and had attained finality. The assessment was not abated at the\ntime of initiation of search action u/s 132 of the Act and as a result

HIVTAP NIRMULAN KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD-1 , YAVATMAL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalehivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit T.B. Karyalayapandharkawada Road, ……………. Appellant Yavatmal -445 001, Maharashtra. Pan–Aabah6751K V/S Income Tax Officer, ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence the appeal deserved to be admitted and decided on merits. 2 Hivtap Nirmulan Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit 3 That the Learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating upon the merits of the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the fact that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE , CHANDRAPUR vs. M/S CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPRATIVE BANK LIMTED , CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3. In the penalty proceedings, the assessee pleaded that it had not filed any inaccurate particulars since the disallowance arose from rejection of statutory claim wherein the relevant facts were already part of the record. Placing heavy reliance on the quantum developments, the Assessing Officer treated the disallowance as a case of fumishing of inaccurate particulars of income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI & CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE, AMRAVATI vs. CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3. In the penalty proceedings, the assessee pleaded that it had not filed any inaccurate particulars since the disallowance arose from rejection of statutory claim wherein the relevant facts were already part of the record. Placing heavy reliance on the quantum developments, the Assessing Officer treated the disallowance as a case of fumishing of inaccurate particulars of income