PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, JAIPUR vs. M/S ANKIT CHIRAG DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Income Tax (TDS) & Works Contract Tax, retention money, insurance, statutory obligation, notices, fees and charges etc would remain same as mentioned in our Work Order dated 01.04.2005 issued & accepted by you.” The above clause is broad enough to hold that the intention of the parties was to treat the supplementary work order, in continuation of, in addition

C I T JAIPUR vs. J D A JAIPUR

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGEETA SHARMA

additions of Rs. 79,76,39,913/- as unspent amount in spite of the fact that the provision of section 11(2) r.w.s. 11(3)(c) are attracted as assessee is not granted exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act? iii) Any other question of law as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTINOS vs. JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGEETA SHARMA

additions of Rs. 79,76,39,913/- as unspent amount in spite of the fact that the provision of section 11(2) r.w.s. 11(3)(c) are attracted as assessee is not granted exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act? iii) Any other question of law as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTINOS vs. JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGEETA SHARMA

additions of Rs. 79,76,39,913/- as unspent amount in spite of the fact that the provision of section 11(2) r.w.s. 11(3)(c) are attracted as assessee is not granted exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act? iii) Any other question of law as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also