JUSCO EDUCATION MISSION FOUNDATION ,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE , RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

154/- made by the Assessing Officer by denying the exemption under Section 11 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the appellant has filed this appeal before us. During the course of hearing before us, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee society is duly recognized and approved by the Central Board

NEERAJ KUMAR SINHA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(1), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayneeraj Kumar Sinha, I.T.O., Prop.-M/S Neeraj Engineering, Chota Ward-1(1), Vs. Ghamaria, Saraikela-Kharsawan, Jamshedpur. Jamshedpur-832108 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Bopps 2885 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

154 dated 17.10.2022, the Return was processed on the same income as per earlier processing u/s 143(1) dated 28.10.2021 and repeated the aforesaid adjustment of Rs. 21,82,243/-, without giving a reasoned order and the grounds on which the claim of the appellant was not accepted. 1.4 That it is started and submitted that Ld. AO erred

SHREE SREE BALANANDA TRUST,DEOGHAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD,, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryshree Sree Balananda Trust, I.T.O., Sri Sri Balananda Ashram, Karinabad, Exemption Ward, Vs. Deoghar, Dist.- Deoghar, Dhanbad. Jharkhand-841112 Pan No. Aabts 0579 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallow a claim for the reason that there is no proof in support of the claim made by the assessee. In a way, the said Clause (iii) of the proviso is analogous to Section 154

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

disallowing sundry creditors u/s 41(1) of the Act. The issue raised by the appellant is, whether the credit purchases can be added under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when all the purchases have been accepted as genuine and all the creditors stood in the books of accounts of the appellant. As regards applicability of provisions

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat - By It Department Si No.

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show cause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of Rs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat - By It Department Si No.

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show cause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of Rs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules

ACIT CIR-2(1), JSR vs. KESHAVJI CHHAGANLAL JEWELLERS PVT LTD , JSR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

disallowed by AO on the ground of excess payment of interest over 12% of Rs.35,98,695/- u/s. 40A(2)(b) of the I.T Act 1961 given on the unsecured loans by the assessee? As per Section 40(b)(iv) payment of interest to partners is restricted to 12% which was forming basis of fair market rate”. 4. Brief facts

MAA CHINNA CEMENT & ISPAT (P) LTD,HAZARIBAGH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiरोक आवेदन (S.A. No.01/Ran/2020 (Arising Out Ita No.203/Ran/2019) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:-2015-16

154. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the following companies have invested the following amounts in the assessee company: 1. Nagina Exports & Finvest Pvt Ltd,. : Rs. 4,83,00,000 2. Tolasariya Viniyog Pvt Ltd. : Rs. 4,36,00,000 3. Lupin Commodeal