Nazareth Hospital Society Vs DCIT Exemption (ITAT Allahabad) In the instant case before us, we have observed that the objects of the donor viz. assessee only permitted to engage in activities to establish and run hospitals, nursing homes, welfare homes, rest houses for the good and benefit of the people, and other objects which are […]
Meja Urja Nigam Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Allahabad) In this case, we have observed that there is a clear finding by ld. Assessing Officer/ld. CIT(A) that earnest money(EMD) given by contractors was forfeited by assessee on account of non completion of work and other miscellaneous recoveries were made from contractors. It is undisputed that […]
District Mining Officer Vs JCIT (TDS) (ITAT Allahabad) It is noted that the Assessing Officer has initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act for the alleged default of delivering the statement of TDS in Form 26Q within the time specified in section 200(3) read with proviso to section 206(3). In the […]
Rajesh Bajaj Vs DCIT (ITAT Allahabad) The ld. counsel for the assessee has contended that Alka Bajaj and Preeti Bajaj are sister-in-law of the assessee and therefore do not fall in the definition of relative as provided u/s 2(41). This fact is not disputed by the Revenue and therefore, the payment to these two persons […]
Where there was difference of amount in question somewhere as per cash in hand as per books of account and lesser cash as per seized documents, it would also not suffice to make addition under section 68 or 69A because every person is at liberty to spend their own amount anywhere as per his choice and assessee had not claimed any deduction in this case. Examining the case of assessee from every possible angle, addition of Rs.37,30,710/- was wholly unjustified.
Once satisfaction note for initiation of proceedings against the assessee under section 158BD was furnished to assessee, the entire grievance of assessee were disposed off and as per AO, in any case incriminating documents and undisclosed assets belonging to assessee were found and seized during search operations conducted by Revenue on Mr. M and hence proceedings initiated against assessee under section 158BD were valid.
