ALL INDIA SECURITISATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ASSOCIATION,CHITRANJAN MARG vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

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

23-26 for provisional registration and the Order of registration was granted to the assessee\nin form 10AC vide PB No.20-22 on 06.10.2021 vide unique registration number AAITA7176ME20212\nunder sub-clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A valid till AY 2024-25. The trust has\napplied for permanent registration on 29th September, 2023 in form

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

charitable activities u/s 2(15),\nit was granted registration u/s 12A - whether, the filing of audit report alongwith\nthe return filed in response to notice u/s 148 will entitle the assessee for benefit\nof computation of section 11 ? - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that, whether it\nis a case of a regular assessment or it is a case

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

charitable activities u/s 2(15),\nit was granted registration u/s 12A - whether, the filing of audit report alongwith\nthe return filed in response to notice u/s 148 will entitle the assessee for benefit\nof computation of section 11 ? - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that, whether it\nis a case of a regular assessment or it is a case

TREHAN SEVA BHARTI CHARITABLE TRUST,ALWAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

C. Parwal, CA, Ld. AR\nRespondent by\n: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR\nDate of hearing\n: 08/01/2025\nDate of pronouncement : 15/01/2025\n\nORDER\nPER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M:\n\nThis two appeals by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(E), Jaipur\ndated 26.07.2024 passed u/s.12AB (1) (b) (ii) (B) and 80G (5) of the Income

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

trust. There is no finding in the order that the activities\nof the trust are not as per the trust deed which warrants rejection of the registration.\nThe apex court has allowed that the if the activities are done at reasonable profit\nrate the same cannot violate the provision of section 11 & 12 of the Act. The\nregistration

BHARATPUR ROYAL FAMILY RELIGIOUS & CEREMONIAL TRUST,BHARATPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, we upheld the order of the ld PCIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 in setting aside the order so passed by the AO and the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed

c) of sub-section (1) of section 16, any income derived from property held under trust or other legal obligation wholly for religious or charitable purposes, in so far as such income is applied or accumulated for application to such religious or charitable purposes as relate to anything done within the taxable territories, and in the case of property

SHRI BHANWAR LAL KHICHI,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

23)(iiiab) of the Act. It has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that the entitlement for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) is subject to two conditions. Firstly the educational institution or the university must be solely for the purpose of education and without any profit motive. Secondly, it must be wholly or substantially financed

BHIWADI INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

23 of the order is reproduced below: "The appellant is a government agency and engaged in the coordinate and planned development of Jaipur region and which is predominant object of it. The learned CIT also erred in applying the provisions of Section 293(c) of the Act, in this case, which applied withdrawal of approval granted under any provision

RAJASTHAN STATE TEXT BOOK BOARD,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

c) Utilizing the funds given by the Government of Rajasthan, Central Government or other institutions for schemes of publication of amenities of educational interest, teaching aids reference books, and the like. (29) To do and execute, in general, such lawful acts, deeds, matters and things as are conducive or incidental to or for the attainment of the aforesaid objects

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

10:28 AM)(43 of 43)[ ITA- 236/2016] considered opinion, is not a valid argument. However, in view of the specific clause which has been there under form 10A, we are of the considered opinion that it will be open for the department while making assessment to follow provision of section 11(5) and section 13 to disallow the expense

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

10:28 AM)(43 of 43)[ ITA- 236/2016] considered opinion, is not a valid argument. However, in view of the specific clause which has been there under form 10A, we are of the considered opinion that it will be open for the department while making assessment to follow provision of section 11(5) and section 13 to disallow the expense

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

10:28 AM)(43 of 43)[ ITA- 236/2016] considered opinion, is not a valid argument. However, in view of the specific clause which has been there under form 10A, we are of the considered opinion that it will be open for the department while making assessment to follow provision of section 11(5) and section 13 to disallow the expense

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE , JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

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 depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

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 depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

SHRI MERH KSHTRIYA SABHA,AJMER vs. CIT(APPEALS), DELHI

23) The A.O. felt that\namount of donation received during the year a sum of Rs. 31,69,001.00 SAHYOG\nRASHI is \"ANONYMOUS DONATION\" & thus invoked provisions of section\n115BBC of Act considering that requisite details of the donors who have contributed\nthe said amount to the assesse trust not filed/ verifiable.\n(5) That complete details with identity

SCHOLARS EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

c), 13(2) and 13(3),\nit will reveal that the status of the Institution cannot be changed from 'charitable' to\n'non charitable' Institution if a minor violation is there. Sub-clause (3) of Section 13\nwould provide that if undue benefit is being provided to any Institution or individual\nbecause of its proximity with the Management, then that

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

10(23C) . Thus, in the opinion of the higher officer i.e. Commissioner the assessee trust was eligible to avail benefit of exemption u/s 11 and 12. Therefore, the Trust Deed of the assessee trust is complete in all respects and all the objectives as specified ITA No. 960/JP/2018 & CO No.05/JP/2020 23 M/s Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust

M/S. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ADD.CIT. RANGE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

trust or institution is to carry out object of general public utility and this is the primary or dominant purpose and not carrying on any activity for profit, ITO Vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association. the same would satisfy the requirements of section 2(15) of the Act. Here, the main object of the appellant was providing financial help

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

trust or institution is to carry out object of general public utility and this is the primary or dominant purpose and not carrying on any activity for profit, ITO Vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association. the same would satisfy the requirements of section 2(15) of the Act. Here, the main object of the appellant was providing financial help