Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the benefit of application of income as per Section 11 of the Act made by the Appellant Trust Towards the charitable objects of the Appellant Trust.
5. under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the statutory deduction under section 24 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 while determining the income of the Appellant Trust under head 'income from house property'.
2. under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT (A) erred in passing Impugned order u/s 250 of the Act without providing opportunity of being heard including personal hearing, thereby violating the principle of natural justice
3. Under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not providing the benefit u/s 11 and 12 of the Act to Appellant.
4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the benefit of application of income as per Section 11 of the Act made by the Appellant Trust Towards the charitable objects of the Appellant Trust.
3. under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not providing the benefit u/s 11 and 12 of the Act to Appellant.
4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the benefit of application of income as per Section 11 of the Act made by the Appellant Trust Towards the charitable objects of the Appellant Trust.
5. under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant.
3. under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not providing the benefit u/s 11 and 12 of the Act to Appellant.
4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the benefit of application of income as per Section 11 of the Act made by the Appellant Trust Towards the charitable objects of the Appellant Trust.
5. under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant.