The assessee is a trust running nine educational institutions under various names catering to different kind of education like Management, Engineering, Medial Sciences, Nursing, Pharmacy, etc. It was granted registration u/s 12AA (2) of the Act by CI..
At the outset, it was pointed out by the learned AR that the tax effect in the present case is less than Rs. 3 lac. He has produced before us the demand notice according to which the total tax has been computed at Rs. 2,12,781/-. The learned DR could..
At the time of hearing before us, it was pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee that this issue is settled in favour of the assessee for AY 2005-06 because the similar disallowance was made in AY 2005-06. The learned CIT (A) allowed the ..
At the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned counsel for the assessee that there are various factual errors in computing the disallowance as per Rule 8D. However, he is not arguing in detail with regard to those errors but, his argum..
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in the present appeals is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of ITAT, Pune Bench dated 7th December, 2011 rendered in assessee’s own case in ITA Nos.983..
In this case, the facts are that the original assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 wherein, apart from others, disallowance on account of payment of interest of Rs. 10832532/- was made. Being aggrieved by the order of..
Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of Rs.7,08,754/-filed on 04.03.2009 by the assessee, after being processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as the Act), was selected for scrutiny w..
From the observation we can find the following fact, it is very clear that assessee has not obtained any benefit of enduring nature. The royalty is payable on the basis of volume of sales year to year. In the event of termination of agreement has to ..
The tax effect in this case is found to be less than Rs.3 lac, the limit prescribed under Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09.02.2011 and when Ld.CIT(DR) was apprised of this fact, she could not controvert the same and she was also unable to show that th..
The brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed its return of income on 30.3.2003 declaring an income of Rs.43,400. This return was processed under sec. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 25.5.2003 at the returned income. According to the ..
Despite sending notice of hearing sufficiently in advance, assessee did not appear nor any application for adjournment has been received at the time of hearing of the appeal, in spite of the fact that earlier also on several dates the hearing was adj..
The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual. He has filed his return of income on 18.12.2006 declaring an income of Rs.155,27,356. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) of t..
Briefly stated the facts of the case for the A.Y. 1998-99 are that the assessee bank filed its return claiming depreciation of `25,70,03,293. The Assessing Officer observed that there was substantial variation between the amount of depreciation as pe..
However, at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application received. Appeal was passed over in the first round. Even in the second round also the position remained the same. The record shows that the ..
The tribunal in the impugned order has examined the factual matrix relating to acquisition/purchase of the equity shares mentioned at serial nos.1 to 3 and the investment in mutual funds. It has reached a categorical and a firm conclusion that the bo..
The facts which revealed from the records are as under. The assessee company is engaged in the business of providing business process management, transitioning services, BPO services to its clients. The assessee is carrying out the said activity from..
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.78,84,241/- being the excess amount of unexpired service contracts holding that since the service contract is spread over 2 accounting ..
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction uls.801B(10) of Rs. 1,90,03,948!- by placing reliance upon various decisions ignoring the facts that the le..
Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that on the basis of information received from the office of Addl.DIT (Investigation), Ghaziabad that the assessee deposited cash in his bank account No.785 in Punjab National Bank, BB Nagar, Ghaziabad duri..
At the time of hearing, it was pointed out that the amount mentioned in the grounds is not correct and the correct amount is Rs. 25,70,208/- instead of Rs. 72,96,230/-. The ld DR has accepted this factual mistake in the ground. Accordingly, we proce..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
