ITAT Jodhpur Judgments — August 2026

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(E)'s order. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh examination, considering the amended provisions of Section 12AB and all submitted documents.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the assessee's applications should be examined on their merits, rather than being rejected solely due to previous errors in filing under incorrect clauses. The CIT(E) was directed to re-examine the applications for registration and approval on their substantive eligibility.

The Tribunal held that the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147 was invalid because it was based on a demonstrably incorrect foundational fact regarding the amount of share application money received. The reassessment order was quashed due to the vitiated jurisdiction.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the subsequent registration under section 12AB, based on the amended trust deed, warranted a fresh examination of the 80G(5) application. The CIT(E) was directed to reconsider the application in light of the amended deed and the 12AB registration.

The Tribunal noted that no grievance survived and the assessees did not wish to pursue the appeals. Consequently, there was nothing left for adjudication and the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal noted that since no grievance survived and the assessees did not wish to pursue the appeals, there was nothing left for adjudication. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that the facts and basis of the addition were materially identical to a previous case decided in favor of the assessee. Following judicial consistency and parity, the addition was deleted.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the assessee's applications should be examined on their merits, rather than being rejected solely due to previous errors in filing under incorrect clauses. The CIT(E) was directed to re-examine the applications for registration and approval on their substantive eligibility.

The Tribunal held that the substantive claim for registration should be examined on merits, as the assessee had attempted to surrender the provisional registration and had now filed under the correct clause. The rejection based on a procedural defect was set aside.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) erred in granting registration under section 12AB when the original application was under section 12AA. Consequently, the registration should be granted under section 12AA, and the taxability for AY 2018-19 should be re-examined based on this.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal categorized the appeals and provided specific directions for each category. The appeals were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration based on the nature of the deficiencies identified in the original orders.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.

The Tribunal held that the appeals should be disposed of with specific directions for each category of deficiency. The Tribunal emphasized that the restored proceedings should be limited to the precise deficiency that led to the impugned order, not a wholesale fresh enquiry.