2010 (7) TMI 89

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN MANMOHAN, J (Oral) 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity "Act 1961") challenging the order dated 27th November, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "ITAT"), for the assessment year 2005-2006. 2. Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned counsel for revenue submitted t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t facilities, which included the facility of a car and telephone. The ld. CIT (Appeals) mentioned that these payments and facilities were made and provided in earlier years also. The AO brought nothing on record to show that either of the facilities provided to her was used for personal purposes. The facilities were the basic facilities necessary for management and administration of the institutio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....acilities did not constitute any benefit provided to her. 5.1 In regard to Mr. Prashant Pandey, it was mentioned by the ld. CIT (Appeals) that he is a qualified architect and was appointed as Bursar to look after general administration, building maintenance and construction of a new block. He was paid gross salary of Rs.2,24,379/-. The AO brought nothing on record to show that the salary was exces....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re was no evidence on record that this salary was excessive. Before us also, the ld. DR was not able to bring any evidence on record that the payment was excessive having regard to services rendered by him. Consequently, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT (Appeals) in this matter also." 4. In our opinion, the issue whether the assessee has violated Section 1....