SUNIL CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 6(5), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Charitable and Chaleshwar Temple Trust vs. CIT (1994) 207 ITR 368 (Bom) held that on a careful reading of the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (4) of Section 139 lead to an inevitable conclusion that a return made within the time specified in sub-section (4) has to be considered as having been made within the time prescribed

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

9 of the impugned order, it has been contended by the ld AR that merely because there was no provision for issuing a separate order of registration in 1922 Act, it would not mean that such recognition/ approval is not saved by section 297(2)(k) of the IT Act, 1961. 21. We will deal with both of these contentions

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

section with effect the A.Y. 2009-10 and onwards. The learned assessing officer disallowed the benefit of exemption to the appellant in the assessment order on the ground that the appellant has violated the investment norms as provided under the four for the trust. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant is having investment in equity shares

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

9] [In favour of assessee]\nThe appellant had duly complied with all procedural requirements while filing the\napplication for registration under section 12AB. The application was submitted in Form\n10AB, along with all requisite documents, including the trust deed, financial statements,\nand a detailed description of the charitable activities undertaken by the trust. However,\nthe rejection of the application

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

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

9] [In favour of assessee]\nThe appellant had duly complied with all procedural requirements while filing the\napplication for registration under section 12AB. The application was submitted in Form\n10AB, along with all requisite documents, including the trust deed, financial statements,\nand a detailed description of the charitable activities undertaken by the trust. However,\nthe rejection of the application

M/S WHOLESALE CLOTH MERCHANT,KOTA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

Charitable Trust vs. DCIT (2019) 6 TMI 595 (Cochin) 4. Application of funds deemed to have been made for the benefit of specified person Section 13(2): In some earlier years there was a miss happening with the assessee association that his president deliberately withdraw cash from association's bank account for his personal use in the name of other

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

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SHEKSHANIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

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

9 and 10][In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) [2021]125 Taxmann.com75 (Gujarat) has held as under: Section 12A, read with section 119, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable trust - Registration Procedure (Condonation of delay in filing Form 10B) - Assessment year 2016-17- Assessee

SETH RB MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BANI PARK ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, such return shall be processed in the following manner, namely:- (a) the total income or loss shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely:- (i) any arithmetical error in the return;[or] (ii) an incorrect claim, if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

Trust (General Rules) 1962 and 1964. c. The Rajasthan Urban Areas (Sub-division, reconstitution and improvement of plots) Rules 1975 etc. 1.19. It will be imperative here to reproduce the preamble of JDA Act which precisely explain the objects of passing JDA Act / UIT Act and also defines the functions of such statutory bodies. Preamble of JDA Act is reproduced

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

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

Trust (General Rules) 1962 and 1964. c. The Rajasthan Urban Areas (Sub-division, reconstitution and improvement of plots) Rules 1975 etc. 1.19. It will be imperative here to reproduce the preamble of JDA Act which precisely explain the objects of passing JDA Act / UIT Act and also defines the functions of such statutory bodies. Preamble of JDA Act is reproduced

DCIT, CIRCLE EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. STATE INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, JAIPR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

charitable purpose. The aforenoted finding by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact giving rise to no question of law.’’ 8 We, accordingly, decline to entertain the appeal. The same is dismissed." Thus respectfully following the above judgments, the addition made by the assessing officer in the order under section 143(3) of the IT Act 1961 dated

AMRITA SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-I EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no order as to costs

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

Trusts are obligated to file the Income Tax Return and Form 10 before the dun date for submitting the Income Tax Return under Section 139(1) of the Act. As per the Section 13(9) of the Act Nothing contained in sub-section (2) of section 11 shall operate so as to exclude any income from the total income

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

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

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

139 of the income-tax Act for the fund or institution in case the Form is not submitted before this date, then the benefit of accumulation would not be available and suich income would be taxable at the applicable rate. Further, the benefit of accumulation would also not be available if return of income is not furnished before

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

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

139 of the income-tax Act for the fund or institution in case the Form is not submitted before this date, then the benefit of accumulation would not be available and suich income would be taxable at the applicable rate. Further, the benefit of accumulation would also not be available if return of income is not furnished before

THE JEWELLERS ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

trust "in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility", the benefit of section 11, read with section 2 (15) cannot be declined. Thus for this reason alone the action of Ld. A.O. denying exemption u/s 11 by invoking Section 13 (8) is unsustainable in law. 9 ITA 197/JP/2022 THE JEWELLERS

A.N. SCHOOL SHIKSHA SAMITI,SIKAR vs. JCIT-RANGE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 252/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2010-11 A.N. School Shiksha Samiti, Cuke J.C.I.T.-Range Vs. Radha Swami Bag, (Exemption) Sikar-303702 Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabaa 6164 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kr Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 25/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 06/09/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Impugned Penalty Order U/S 272A(2)(E) Dated 02/11/2018 As Well As Notices Are Bad In Law & On Facts Of The Case, For Want Of Jurisdiction & Various Other Reasons & Hence The Same May Kindly Be Quashed. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law As Well As On The Facts Of The Case In Confirming The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs. 2,53,700/- U/S 272A(2)(E) Invoked By The Ld Jcit. The Penalty So Imposed & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) Being Totally Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts On The Record & Hence The Same May Kindly Be Deleted.

139(4A)—Penalty not justified.—ITO vs. St. Michaeals Education Foundation (1992) 43 ITD 656 (Del) followed In the case of Shri Bhandup Jain Temple vs. DDIT (1995) 14 CCH 0307 MumTrib (1996) 54 TTJ 0104 It has been held that Penalty under s. 272A(2)(e)—Leviability—Assessee a trust registered as charitable trust enjoying tax exemption—Its belief

JHALAWAR KENDRIYA SAHAKARI BNAK LTD,JHALAWAR vs. ADL/ADIT (I&CI), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.

section 139(4A) rws 139(1)—An attempt of deliberateness or deceptiveness is associated with the word 'failure'—In the present case, there was no deliberateness or deceptiveness in not filing the return of income within the prescribed time limit—Assessee was under a bonafide belief that securing recognition u/s 80G would be a pre requisite for filing the return