HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US (Judicial Member), SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal found that while the CIT(A) considered some evidence, it disregarded other material. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the AO for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to make full disclosure and submit documents.

SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

The ITAT found that it was a clear case of non-capturing figures due to a technical glitch and that the assessee had indeed incurred charitable expenditure. The appeal is restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo adjudication to verify the claim of expenses for charitable purposes and then decide on the eligibility for exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the approval for reopening under Section 151 was mechanical and not in accordance with law, as established by various High Court and Supreme Court decisions. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.

DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, in the interest of justice, remanded the matter back to the first appellate authority to grant the assessee an opportunity to present his case with necessary evidence.

DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had not properly adjudicated the appeal on merits and had failed to consider the evidence submitted by the assessee, such as affidavits from donors and their financial documents. Following the precedent set by the Bombay High Court, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case for de novo adjudication.

DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted it for hearing. Although the assessee did not appear, the Tribunal proceeded to hear the appeal based on the grounds and issues involved. The Tribunal observed that the society was duly registered and had obtained provisional registration. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had agreed to incorporate the missing clauses in its MOA.

SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the net profit rate applied by the AO was not based on comparable cases or past trends. The reasoning of the CIT(A) for not admitting additional evidence was also found unsatisfactory. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A).

SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals for non-prosecution without deciding them on merits. The CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of appeals in writing with well-reasoned orders, even if the assessee does not appear, and cannot dismiss them solely for non-prosecution.

SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution and is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and remanded the matters back for adjudication on merits.

SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that both parties agreed for a remand of the matters to the AO for fresh adjudication. This was in line with a previous order of the Tribunal concerning other assessment years of the same assessee.