BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

6 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 80G(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai75Kolkata32Chennai25Delhi24Bangalore16Chandigarh13Ahmedabad11Indore7Jaipur6Lucknow4Cochin2Hyderabad2Raipur1Rajkot1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 12A23Section 107Exemption5Section 80G4Section 2(15)4Natural Justice4Addition to Income2

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

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

ITA 775/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

bogus activities and thus application for registration was considered liable to be rejected. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB was considered as liable to be rejected. The ld. CIT(E) also clarified that applicant’s provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub- section (1) of section 12A of the Income

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

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

ITA 777/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024

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

For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

bogus activities and thus application for registration was considered liable to be rejected. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB was considered as liable to be rejected. The ld. CIT(E) also clarified that applicant’s provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub- section (1) of section 12A of the Income

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

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

ITA 778/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024

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

For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

bogus activities and thus application for registration was considered liable to be rejected. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB was considered as liable to be rejected. The ld. CIT(E) also clarified that applicant’s provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub- section (1) of section 12A of the Income

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

ITA 776/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024
For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

bogus activities and thus\napplication for registration was considered liable to be rejected. In view of\nabove discussion assessee's claim of registration section 12AB was\nconsidered as liable to be rejected. The Id. CIT(E) also clarified that\napplicant's provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 12A of the Income

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

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

ITA 452/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sharvan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta, (CIT)
Section 10Section 143(3)

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

SHRI YOGENDRA KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, ground no. 4

ITA 906/JPR/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev SoganiFor Respondent: Shri R. A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80E

5. The submission so filed by the assessee was considered by the AO but was not found acceptable. The AO observed that Smt. Pushpa Khandelwal who is the wife of the assessee also runs business in the trade of iron & steel in the same line of business, at the same time, she is receiving commission from her husband Sh. Yogendra