TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was made by the ld. AO is quashed. - I.T.A. Nos.125 to 127/Asr/2013 And I.T.A. No.151/Asr/2019 - - - Dated:- 21-12-2022 - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. K. Bhagat, CA. For the Respondent : Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT. DR ORDER PER: BENCH: The batch of 4 appeals of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ludhiana,[in brevity the CIT (A) ]for A.Ys. 2007-08 to 2009-10.The impugned orders were emanated from the order of the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Jalandhar, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 153A r.w.s 144 and u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. During appeal pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is very negligible. The ld. CIT-DR has not made any objection for condonation of delay. Therefore, the delay of 01 day is condoned. 3. Brief fact of the case is that the batch of appeal in ITA No. 125 to 127/Asr/2013 are the same factual issue. As per the request of the ld. Counsel, ITA No. 125/Asr/2013 is taken as a lead case. However, the ITA No. 151/Asr/2019 was related to 271(1)(c) of the Act which will be adjudicated at the later part of the order. The dispute in between assessee and the revenue is that as per the revenue a search was conducted in the director s premises of the assessee. The assessment was completed u/s 153A of the Act. On the other hand, the grievance of the assessee is that the assessee is an educational socie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly the records are produced before the Bench. In Panchnama there is no mention of name of assessee during search of director s place. Only in the warrant, the assessee s name was mentioned. But the warrant was not executed during search against assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further argued that the assessee is educational society and was eligible for deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) as the gross receipts are below the specified quantum in preceding year. So, the entire addition amount is not under the purview of the tax. 5. The ld. CIT DR in argument verified the documents duly available in the records. But he was unable to show any documents before the bench whether the search was conducted against the assessee. So, there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngthen the belief that department is deliberately avoiding the supply of important relevant documents which are very important for the disposal of appeal. Therefore, the failure of the Ld AO may please be taken as he has nothing more to say in this matter the appeal of the assessee may please be accepted. As per the copy of the warrant of authorization supplied as annexure 3 4 is in the names of M/s K.C. Social welfare, M/s Krishna Devi Educational Society, Sh Prem Pal Gandhi, Sh Ashwani Kumar and the place mentioned as K.C Group of Institute at Karyam Road Nawashahar and witnesses to this warrant are Sh Jatinder Kumar Sh Harjinder Singh. Whereas the copy of the panchnama supplied as annexure 1 2 is related to the above mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
