9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 875X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant assessee that the appellant assessee entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi - The Assessing Officer has not accepted the Memorandum of Understanding and has felt that the same had been created subsequently as an eyewash. Held that:- Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi represented to be the Managing Director of M/s Bhanu & Sons Pvt. Ltd - Memorandum of Understanding stated that M/s Bhanu & Sons Pvt. Ltd. owns properties, as mentioned in the said Memorandum of Understanding - It is the contention of the appellant assessee that in connection with the said Memorandum of Understanding, the payment of Rs. 10 lacs was made - The Memorandum of Understanding suggests that the payments, to be made thereunder, are to be mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant assessee and the said state of affairs clearly indicates that the appellant assessee is not existing solely for educational purpose but also for purpose of profit. It has been the contention of the appellant assessee that the appellant assessee entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi. While entering into the said Memorandum of Understanding, Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi represented to be the Managing Director of M/s Bhanu Sons Pvt. Ltd. and further represented that she has been authorized by a resolution of the Board of Directors of M/s Bhanu Sons Pvt. Ltd. dated 16th August, 1988 to enter into the said Memorandum of Understanding. Memorandum of Understanding stated that M/s Bhanu Sons Pvt. Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elevant assessment. The Assessing Officer has not accepted the Memorandum of Understanding and has felt that the same had been created subsequently as an eyewash. Before coming to the said conclusion, the Assessing Officer did not call upon the appellant assessee to produce Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer did not take note of, how the sum of Rs.10 lacs paid by the appellant assessee to Smt. Chandra Raj Laxmi during the assessment year 1996-97 was adjusted by her in her returns. It does not appear, therefore, that the finding that the Memorandum of Understanding was an eyewash is founded on legal basis. 3. We, accordingly, interfere and remit back the matter for reconsideration by the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
