WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

charitable object of the trust was the imparting of education which falls\nu/s.2(15) of the Act. The newspaper business was incidental to the attainment\nof the object of the trust, namely that of imparting education and the profits of\nthe newspaper business are utilized by the trust for achieving the object of\nimparting education. In this case, there

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SH. TARA CHAND GUPTA, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

bogus purchases. Similarly Gujarat High Court decision is in respect of fictitious purchase invoices where the High Court disallowed 25% of such purchases. Hence this decision is also distinguishable on facts. Considering that overall facts we direct the ld. AO to consider the income on the transaction to the extent of the gross profit declared Sh. Tarachand Gupta

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

bogus purchases. Similarly Gujarat High Court decision is in respect of fictitious purchase invoices where the High Court disallowed 25% of such purchases. Hence this decision is also distinguishable on facts. Considering that overall facts we direct the ld. AO to consider the income on the transaction to the extent of the gross profit declared Sh. Tarachand Gupta

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

bogus expenses and by\nusing the money of trust by taking the various advances. However, it is further cleared\nthat Honble Apex Court in three recent decision namely Ahmedabad developmental\nauthority 143 taxman 278, New Nobel Education 143 taxman 246, and Baba Banda\nBahadur Civil Appeal No. 10511 of 2013, had made remarkable change, where the theory\nof dominant objects

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA no

trust is required to get its accounts audited under anyprovision of the\nAct,Assessee trust has not filed its return of income before issuing noticeus 148 of the\nAct and asked to explain the reasons for not submitting ITRwithin time limit. If return\nis not filed by prescribed date then benefit ofaccumulation us 11(2) will not be\navailable

MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed exemption u/s. 11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to satisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that the assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of donations and, therefore, the amount

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

purchased the gift\nitems with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The\nassessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries.\nThe society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society\ndid not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities.\nHowever, the Learned Commissioner of Income

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj 51/117 Sec 5, Pratap Nagar Sanganer, Jaipur cuke Vs. The CIT, Exemption Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATU 6874 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@D

Trust Act, 1959. The society help to poors and needy persons. The society’s object and activity is fully charitable. Recognized as a charitable entity under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the society meticulously maintained proper books of accounts and records. Furthermore, the society promptly responded to notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption. However

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPURTHE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

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

Trust Act, 1959. The society help to poors and needy persons. The society’s object and activity is fully charitable. Recognized as a charitable entity under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the society meticulously maintained proper books of accounts and records. Furthermore, the society promptly responded to notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption. However

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Trust Act, 1959. The society help to poors and needy persons. The society’s object and activity is fully charitable. Recognized as a charitable entity under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the society meticulously maintained proper books of accounts and records. Furthermore, the society promptly responded to notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption. However

SOURABH AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

charitable purposes. However the appellant has not done so. Further it is not the case of the appellant that he has obtained registration under section 12A/12AA. The appellant has also not complied with the legal provisions of trust and exemption provisions under section 11 and 12 regarding the registration of trust and regarding the application of the voluntary contribution

SAURABH AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,ALWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

charitable purposes. However the appellant has not done so. Further it is not the case of the appellant that he has obtained registration under section 12A/12AA. The appellant has also not complied with the legal provisions of trust and exemption provisions under section 11 and 12 regarding the registration of trust and regarding the application of the voluntary contribution

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

bogus purchases, and non-existing cash balance in the books of account Similar observations were made by ITAT, Jaipur Bench, in the case of Raj Kumar Nowal, ITA No. 165/JP/2022, Jaipur Bench, 2.13. Attention is drawn towards Hon’ble ITAT, Vishakhapatnam Bench in the case of Hirapanna Jewellers, I.T.A. No. 253/Viz/2020. The facts in this case are that the assessee

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed\nexemption u/s.11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to\nsatisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that\nthe assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of\ndonations and, therefore, the amount

APEKSHA TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION ), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.267/JP/2025 Under Section 12AB of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2024-25 Apeksha Trust D-341, Murilipura Scheme, Jaipur – 302 039 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAITA2951 N अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे/Assesseeby :Shri C.P. Chawla, ITP राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT –DR,(Thru: V.C.) सुनवाई

charitable activity and it cannot be ascertained that activities of the trust are as per objects of the trust. Hence, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s claim of registration u/s 12AB of the Act by observing as under:-. 3 APEKSHA TRUST VS CIT (E), JAIPUR ‘’04. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB

RAJESH PRODUCTS,TONK ,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

bogus purchases has led\nto mushrooming of facilitators, commonly referred to as 'accommodation entry\nproviders who rotate funds for such purchase/sales in an attempt to authenticate\nsuch transactions. Many a times the entities doing genuine business also\nprovides accommodation bills and is it not necessary that the accommodation\nentry provider has to be exclusively into such practice. There are number

VIVEKANDA SHIKSHA SAMITI,PALWAS ROAD, SIKAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

charitable society with the\nmain object of carrying out educational activities. A search and seizure action u/s\n132 was carried out on the members of Prince Group, Sikar on 10/03/2018 of\nwhich assessee is one of the entity. In response to notice u/s 153C, the appellant\nfiled its return of income declaring total income

GARGI GLOBAL ACADEMY SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

charitable society with the main object of carrying out educational activities. A search and seizure action u/s 132 was carried out on the members of Prince Group, Sikar on 10/03/2018 of which assessee is one of the entity. In response to notice u/s 153C, the appellant filed its return of income declaring total income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

charitable or not genuine or not carried out in accordance with all or any of the conditions subject to which it was granted approval. The Two grounds on which the ld. CIT(E) withdrew the approval are falling under clause (i) of the 13th proviso. To bring the case of investments/ deposits of fund in the purview of clause