NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

TDS on interest payment to M/s SE Investment Ltd. and disallowance of Rs. 1,27,67,676/-on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80G and the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench Jaipur vide its order dated 01.10.2018 set aside the aforesaid issues to the file of the AO to verify the claim of the assessee that recipient NBFCs

NASH FASHIONS (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purposes

5 reads as under: "For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that no deduction shall be allowed under this section in respect of any donation unless such donation is of a sum of money." 7. After the insertion of the aforesaid Explanation, there cannot be any doubt that, for purposes of claiming deduction, only cash amounts which

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

In the result, revenue’s ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

iii) deleting the addition of Rs. 5,52,000/- out of total addition of Rs. 7,94,000/- made by the AO u/s 40A(2)(b) out of salary paid; (iv) deleting the addition of Rs. 4,90,07,505/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of deduction claimed by assessee u/s 80G.” 3. In its first ground

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

TDS on interest payment to M/s SE\nInvestment Ltd. and disallowance of Rs.1,27,67,676/-on account of\ndisallowance of deduction u/s 80G and the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench Jaipur\nvide its order dated 01.10.2018 set aside the aforesaid issues to the file of the\nAO to verify the claim of the assessee that recipient NBFCs has taken

AGRASEN MEDICAL RELIEF & RESEARCH SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. ITO(E), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1026/JPR/2025 निर्धरणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2016-17 Agrasen Medical Relief & Research Society Central Spine, Sector -7, Vidhyadhr Nagar Jaipur - 302 039 (Raj) बनाम Vs. अपीलार्थी / Appellant स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAATA 7540F The ITO (E) Ward - 1 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby :Shri P.C.Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudh

5 of section 80G. We also find that AO in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dated 10.2.2014 for AY 2011-12 has accepted that assessee is registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The assessee has subsequently been granted fresh registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act, the precondition of which is that the trust or institution

M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

iii) of the Act and further holding that the said\ndisallowance cannot be added back to the assessee's income computed under\nthe provisions of section 115JB of the Act.\"\n30. Similar is the position in the Hon'ble High Court in relation to\nother assessment years wherein Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT has decided\nthe aforesaid issue of overlay

TIRUPATI COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with

80G of the IT Act vide registration certificate dated 26/29.10.2010(PB18), thereafter approval under section 10 (23C) (vi) of the tax Act. 1961 vide notification No. 18/2010-11 endorsed vide letter no CCIT/ Addl. CIT (H.qrs)/JPR/10 (23C) (vi)/2010-11/3049 dated 23/25.11.2010 has also been granted to the assessee. The assessee society is filling its return of income regularly and assessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

section 142(1) of the Act dated 13.02.2021 was asked to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of loan transactions. The assessee submitted details and on perusal of the same ld. AO noticed that it has failed to justify the unsecured loan from the following parties. (i) Aventez Media Technology- The assessee has received loan