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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable-Held, yes-Whether on 15 ITA 197/JP/2022 THE JEWELLERS ASSOCIATION VS ACIT, CIRCLE-1 JAIPUR fact that some of activities carried out by an entity involving charging of fee, etc. had resulted in a surplus could not ipso facto be determinative of fact that there was an element of profit motive-Held, yes -Whether, therefore, proviso to section

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

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes\nPrayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the\ninstant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction\nthat is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is\nartificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for\nsuch

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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

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

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

KRANTI MAHILA MANCH,ALWAR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed for

charitable activities by way of relief of the poor and also education. Relief of poor is achieved by providing support to poor women in different SHGs in terms of helping them with get Bank Credit and providing training/education and services to improve their livelihoods. 1.1.ii The benefit is not limited to the members of the appellant trusts. On the contrary

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,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)

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

ARUN KUMAR PALAWAT,JAIPUR vs. PR CIT, JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Charitable Trust (1987) 167 ITR (129) (Rajasthan), CIT Vs. Godawari Sugar Mills Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Shakti Charities (2000) 160 CTR 107 (Mad.). The facts and submissions are verifiable from the assessment record. The Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Green World Corporation (2009) 314 ITR 81 (Supreme Court) held that ‘The jurisdiction under

SAMAJIK PRERNA AVAM GRAMIN VIKAS SANSTHAN LAPORIYA,DUDU, JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

section 12AB of IT Act as activities are not genuine and many of trust is being run by management for personal benefit ‘’04. In view of above discussion applicant’s application for registrat4ion u/s 12AB is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on followinggrounds:- M/s. SAMAJIK PRERNA AVAM GRAMIN VIKAS SANSTHAN LAPORIYA VS CIT (E), JAIPUR  Assessee having

SAMAJIK PRERNA AVAM GRAMIN VIKAS SANSTHAN LAPORIYA,DUDU, JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

section 12AB of IT Act as activities are not genuine and many of trust is being run by management for personal benefit ‘’04. In view of above discussion applicant’s application for registrat4ion u/s 12AB is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on followinggrounds:- M/s. SAMAJIK PRERNA AVAM GRAMIN VIKAS SANSTHAN LAPORIYA VS CIT (E), JAIPUR  Assessee having

UTKARASH SANASTHA,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such

SHRI RADHA GOVIND LASHKARI,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust (1987) 167 ITR (129) (Rajasthan), CIT Vs. Godawari Sugar Mills Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Shakti Charities (2000) 160 CTR 107 (Mad.). The facts and submissions are verifiable from the assessment record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Green World Corporation (2009) 314 ITR 81 (SC) held that ‘The jurisdiction

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

155(High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur 20-21 Bench) 6. CIT vs. R.S. Rathore[1996] 86 Taxman 20(High Court of Rajasthan)212 ITR 390 22-24 7. CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities (P.) Ltd. [2011] 9 taxmann.com 179 (Delhi) (High Court 25-34 of Delhi)[333 ITR 119 (Delhi)] 8. Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (Supreme

PALSANA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD.,PALSANA vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 35 To 37/Jp/2021 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Palsana Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Cuke Pr.Cit-2, Vs. Limited, Jaipur. Village- Palsana Main Market, Palsana, Dist.- Sikar- 332402 (Raj) Pan No.: Aabap 8390 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shrawan Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 04/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-2, Jaipur All Dated 31/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2010-11 To 2012-13. 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

Charitable Trust [1987] 65 CTR (Raj.) 30 : [1987] 167 ITR 129 (Raj.) Thus it is clear that Assessing Officer has made enquiry but sufficiency of enquiry can be depend upon from person to person. The AO cannot remain passive in the face of a return which is apparently in order but calls for further enquiry. It is the duty

PALSANA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 35 To 37/Jp/2021 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Palsana Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Cuke Pr.Cit-2, Vs. Limited, Jaipur. Village- Palsana Main Market, Palsana, Dist.- Sikar- 332402 (Raj) Pan No.: Aabap 8390 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shrawan Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 04/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-2, Jaipur All Dated 31/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2010-11 To 2012-13. 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

Charitable Trust [1987] 65 CTR (Raj.) 30 : [1987] 167 ITR 129 (Raj.) Thus it is clear that Assessing Officer has made enquiry but sufficiency of enquiry can be depend upon from person to person. The AO cannot remain passive in the face of a return which is apparently in order but calls for further enquiry. It is the duty

PALSANA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD.,PALASANA vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 35 To 37/Jp/2021 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Palsana Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Cuke Pr.Cit-2, Vs. Limited, Jaipur. Village- Palsana Main Market, Palsana, Dist.- Sikar- 332402 (Raj) Pan No.: Aabap 8390 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shrawan Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 04/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-2, Jaipur All Dated 31/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2010-11 To 2012-13. 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

Charitable Trust [1987] 65 CTR (Raj.) 30 : [1987] 167 ITR 129 (Raj.) Thus it is clear that Assessing Officer has made enquiry but sufficiency of enquiry can be depend upon from person to person. The AO cannot remain passive in the face of a return which is apparently in order but calls for further enquiry. It is the duty