VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust Vs. CBDT &Anr. (2024) 8 NYPCTR 418/ 161 Taxmann.com 209(Case laws compilation index PB 46- 53)has held that the cl. (ii) of the Circular dt. 24th May, 2023 is arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, would be ultra vires the Constitution and therefore directed to consider the applications

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)

115 of the Act which lays down as follows: "105. Ultimate dissolution of Trust, and transfer of its assets and liabilities to the Municipal Board. - (1) When all schemes sanctioned under this Act have been executed or have been so far executed as to render the continued existence of the Trust, in the opinion of the State 6 Bhiwadi Integrated

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

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

section\n11 (2) and 11(1)(a) of the\nAct\n33,50,772/-\n33,50,772/-\n5.\nUnverifiable Creditors\n16,75,286/-\n16,75,286/-\n6.\n15% of Construction\nExpenses\n1,20,00,440/-\n1,20,00,440/-\n7.\nDisallowance of Rs\n3,69,567 out of total\nexpenses

SANDEEP SETHI ,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (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

RAJIV NIGOTIYA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (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

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

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

Charitable or\nreligious trust - Registration of (Deemed registration) - Whether where assessee-society\nfiled an application under section 12A for grant of registration on 24-2-2003 and same\nwas not responded to within six months, registration of application was to be deemed to\nhave taken effect from 24-8-2003 - Held, yes\nPara 3. The short issue is with regard

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

115 CCH 0026 KolHC Reassessment—Reopening of\nassessment—Assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.\nNIL—Return was processed under Section 143 (1—A survey was conducted\nfrom which it was found that assessee has deposited money with NIL—It was\nfurther seen that said company is a specified person of assessee—According to\nAssessing Officer

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

115 CCH 0026 KolHC Reassessment—Reopening of\nassessment—Assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.\nNIL—Return was processed under Section 143 (1—A survey was conducted\nfrom which it was found that assessee has deposited money with NIL—It was\nfurther seen that said company is a specified person of assessee—According to\nAssessing Officer

RAM NIWAS YADAV,SHAHPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BEHROR, BEHROR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Sections 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c), and 274 cannot be mechanically appended to an arbitrary and procedurally flawed assessment order. Since the main proceedings conducted by the ITO lack legal and factual sanctity, the consequent penalty proceedings are also rendered invalid and untenable in law. Such mechanical initiation of penalty proceedings not only violates the statutory provisions but also

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

115 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 38 (SC)/[2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC)[06- 04-2023], for revenue loss being assessee’s claim that the order was erroneous or prejudicious to the Revenue. Assessee failed to sustain this that order of Ld. Assessing Officer and CIT(A) was erroneous and prejudicial to assessee. But on the other hand not assessing

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

115 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 38 (SC)/[2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC)[06- 04-2023], for revenue loss being assessee’s claim that the order was erroneous or prejudicious to the Revenue. Assessee failed to sustain this that order of Ld. Assessing Officer and CIT(A) was erroneous and prejudicial to assessee. But on the other hand not assessing

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

115 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 38 (SC)/[2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC)[06- 04-2023], for revenue loss being assessee’s claim that the order was erroneous or prejudicious to the Revenue. Assessee failed to sustain this that order of Ld. Assessing Officer and CIT(A) was erroneous and prejudicial to assessee. But on the other hand not assessing

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

115 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 38 (SC)/[2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC)[06- 04-2023], for revenue loss being assessee’s claim that the order was erroneous or prejudicious to the Revenue. Assessee failed to sustain this that order of Ld. Assessing Officer and CIT(A) was erroneous and prejudicial to assessee. But on the other hand not assessing

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

115 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 38 (SC)/[2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC)[06-\n04-2023], for revenue loss being assessee's claim that the order was erroneous\nor prejudicious to the Revenue. Assessee failed to sustain this that order of Ld.\nAssessing Officer and CIT(A) was erroneous and prejudicial to assessee. But on\nthe other hand not assessing

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

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

Charitable or religious trust - Registration of (Deemed registration) - Whether where assessee-society filed an application under section 12A for grant of registration on 24-2-2003 and same was not responded to within six months, registration of application was to be deemed to have taken effect from 24-8-2003 - Held, yes Para 3. The short issue is with regard

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

Charitable Trust [2022] 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras) [31-10-2022] "63. The statements given to the Assessing officer under section 132 (4) have legal force. Unless the retractions are made within a short span of time, supported by affidavit swearing that the contents are incorrect and it was obtained under force, coercion and by lodging

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

Bench: Him.

115 taxmann.com 342. The facts in this case are assessee company was engaged in purchase and sale of dry fruits and other grocery items. It deposited Rs.180.53 crore post-demonetization in its Bank accounts, out of sale proceeds. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee submitted details of closing stock, list of debtors, details of purchases and sales party-wise