SHREE SAINATH SARVAJANIK SEWA MANDAL TRUST,UNA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.204/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Shree Sainath Sarvajanik Sewa Vs. The Ito, Exemption Ward, Mandal Trust, Surat. N.H. No.8, Near Ganesh Sisodra, Unn-396445, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafts7802P (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Revenue By: Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 12/05/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] National Faceless Appeal Centre (In Short ‘Nfac), Delhi, In Appeal No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1036051308(1) Dated 30.09.2021, Which In Turn Arises Out Of A Penalty Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

charitable trust and registered u/s 12A of the IT Act. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y.2016-17 on 21.09.2016 declaring total income at Rs. Nil and thereby claiming refund of Rs.7,20,730/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was finalized u/s 143(3) by making addition of Rs.20,63,925/- on account of disallowance

MASJID-E-MOAZZAN & MAZAR-E-SAIFEE,,SURAT vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.451/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 Masjid-E-Moazzan & Mazar-E- Assistant Commissioner Saifee, Of Income Tax, 3/873, Devdi Mubarak, Circle-2, Surat Zampa Bazar, Surat 395002 Pan:Aatmb 8182 R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

trust. 6. Being, aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). The CIT (A) following his order in the case of Dawat Properties has allowed depreciation to the extent pertaining to properties for which, the income of rental income of Rs.42,499 has been derived. For which also, the assessee has not furnished quantum of depreciation. However

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG, KAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,, NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,.,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, , NAVSARI

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\n25\nfor payment of price higher

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE., NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,, NAVASARI

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,GANDEVI vs. ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

SAHADARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than

SAHAKARI KHAND UDUOG MANDAL LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.DCIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\nfor payment of price higher than