Nababharat Shiksha Parishad vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela

Heard.

Admit.

The following questions of law are framed:

(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in sustaining the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2 without any decision on merit in respect of jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to complete the scrutiny assessment in violation of CBDT guidelines for scrutiny assessment (assessment year 2010-11) published on 10.9.2011?

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law to uphold the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2 on diversion of funds of Rs.88,04,000/- in violation of provisions of section 11(5) and 13(1)(d) of the Act although the Appellant's case falls u/s 11(1) of the Act?

(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in confirming the addition of Rs.88,04,000/- despite the said advance is not an investment or deposit as per Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act?

Paper book be filed within eight weeks.

List after filing of the paper book.