AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Charitable activities carried out for the entire society and not just for pareek samaj: There is incorrect observation of the ld. CIT that the trust is working only for Pareek samaj which is apparently incorrect and contrary to the information and evidences brought on record by the assessee. ITA No. 1184 & 1185/JP/2024 Akhil Bharatvarshiya Papeek Ashram Trust Akhil Bharatvarshiya Papeek

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

section 12A. This application was rejected for three reasons\nas would appear from the last page of the order passed by the Id. CIT\n(Exemption) (herein after referred to as the CIT) precisely on the following three\ngrounds:\na. Discrepancy in dissolution clause-trust is revocable\nb. Object for the benefit of the particular community\nc. Non genuineness

RAM BHAROSE SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes as indicated above

156 of the Act was received by Sh. Vipin Singhal, CA and AR of the appellant on 04.03.2014. The appeal in the instance case is to be filed in Form No. 35 within 30 days of receipt of order i.e. by 03.04.2014. However, the appeal in Form No. 35 was filed on 29.01.2016, wherein the date of service of order

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)

156 was issued in pursuance of the aforesaid order raising the demand of Rs. Rs. 12,81,870/- against the assessee. 6. That, the aforesaid order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the ld. ITO, Behror, was challenged by the assessee by filing an appeal under Section 246A of the IT Act, before the ld. CIT, (Appeals) which got transferred to NFAC

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 :

Section 127 notice was served; if the assessee perceived prejudice, she ought to have objected then. Silence amounts to acceptance. o J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC) — where notice warned that non-response would be treated as “no objection,” silence led the Court to presume no objection and uphold transfer (Paper Book 1 Page

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 :

Section 127 notice was served; if the assessee perceived prejudice, she ought to have objected then. Silence amounts to acceptance. o J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC) — where notice warned that non-response would be treated as “no objection,” silence led the Court to presume no objection and uphold transfer (Paper Book 1 Page

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 :

Section 127 notice was served; if the assessee perceived prejudice, she ought to have objected then. Silence amounts to acceptance. o J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC) — where notice warned that non-response would be treated as “no objection,” silence led the Court to presume no objection and uphold transfer (Paper Book 1 Page

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 :

Section 127 notice was served; if the assessee perceived prejudice, she ought to have objected then. Silence amounts to acceptance. o J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC) — where notice warned that non-response would be treated as “no objection,” silence led the Court to presume no objection and uphold transfer (Paper Book 1 Page

MINISTRY OF COMPASSION INDIA,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

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

156 ITD 0117 (Chd.) • Bhagwan Mahavir Purusharth Prena Nidhi Nyas Vs. CIT (2012) (144 TTJ 379 (Jpr.) • Kul foundation Vs. CIT (2015) 43 CCH 0115 (Pune) Ministry of Compassion India Vs. CIT(E), jaipur • Aggarwal Mitra Mandal Trust vs. DIT (Exemp.) 293 ITR (AT) 259/106 ITD 531 (Del.) 3.2 It was further submitted that in the object clauses wherever Lord

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

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

Section 127 notice was served; if\nthe assessee perceived prejudice, she ought to have objected then. Silence\namounts to acceptance.\nΟ J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC) — where notice warned that\nnon-response would be treated as “no objection,” silence led the Court to\npresume no objection and uphold transfer (Paper Book 1 Page

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act 1932 also support this contention. Thus, the 'partnership firm' and partners have been collectively seen and the distinction between the two was removed in the judicial precedents even for taxation purposes. 6.2.3 On the other hand, interest paid on borrowed capital u/s 36(1)(iii) presupposes a transaction between two independent entities, which

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

156,500.00\nJune\n15,503,300.00\n11,377,300.00\nJuly\n13,798,700.00\n22,227,000.00\nAugust\n23,015,000.00\n24,518,000.00\nSeptember\n34,568,700.00\n23,145,500.00\nOctober\n23,614,200.00\n15,034,500.00\nNovember\n40,396,500.00\n15,364,500.00\nDecember\n16,883,500.00\n9,394,800.00\nJanuary\n12,258,700.00\n11,637,100.00\nFebruary

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