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

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

JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 164(2), proviso is applicable only to that part of income of the trust which has forfeited exemption and not the entire income. Relevant paragraph reads as under: 8 JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY VS CIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR Sec. 164(2) refers to the relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

section 13. Hence, the decision is not found to\nbe applicable in the facts of the case.\nThe appellant has relied upon the case of Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable\nTrust vs CIT(Central) (2017) (1) TMI 1671 (Cochin) It has been held that the\nCIT was erred in withdrawing registration granted u/s 12AA, by using her\npowers u/s12AA

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 13. Hence, the decision is not found to\nbe applicable in the facts of the case.\nThe appellant has relied upon the case of Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable\nTrust vs CIT(Central) (2017) (1) TMI 1671 (Cochin) It has been held that the\nCIT was erred in withdrawing registration granted u/s 12AA, by using her\npowers u/s12AA

SHRI PARNAMI PANCHAYAT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

161 ITD 1 (ITAT Cochin Bench) 9 Shri Parnami Panchayat 16.3. Centre for Cellular and Molecular Platforms, ITA No. 271/Bang/2018, ITAT, Bangalore Bench 16.4. Shree Khathu Shyam Jangid Brahman Dharamshala, ITA No. 1845/Del/2020, ITAT Delhi Bench 17. The aforementioned ratio has also been upheld by Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shree Shyam Mandir Committee

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

Charitable or\nreligious trust Exemption of income from property held under (Audit objection)\n Assessment year 2016-17 Assessment of assessee-trust was completed under section\n143(3) at 'Nil' income - Revenue audit party, however, objected to finalization of retum of\nassessee-trust at 'Nil' for reason that during year, assessee received corpus donations\nwhich were not included in income

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

trust reposed in doctors. Therefore, it is a matter of great public importance and concern, when it is demonstrated that a doctor's prescription can be manipulated, and driven by the motive to avail the freebies offered to them by pharmaceutical companies. These freebies are technically not 'free' - the cost of supplying such freebies is usually factored into the drug

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

trust reposed in doctors. Therefore, it is a matter of great public importance and concern, when it is demonstrated that a doctor's prescription can be manipulated, and driven by the motive to avail the freebies offered to them by pharmaceutical companies. These freebies are technically not 'free' - the cost of supplying such freebies is usually factored into the drug

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

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

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

161 Taxmann.com 114 (Bombay) has held as under: Section 11, read with sections 119 and 139, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and rule 17 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962- Charitable or religious trust - Exemption of income from property held under (Form no. 10) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-trust filed audit report inform no. 10B and sought

YUWAM EDUCATION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

161 including the surrendered undisclosed income of Rs. 46,68,283. However, the appellant filed its return of income declaring net profit of Rs. 52,18,157 against which the learned Assessing Officer made addition for suppression of business profits amounting to Rs. 1,03,32,004 (1,55,50,16152,18,157) being the difference of profits accepted

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

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

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)

161- from the trust. After considering the above discrepancies, it is clear assessee trust is siphoning of money. Thus, it is clear that activities are not genuine and trustee are siphoning of funds. This makes trust ineligible for registration under section 12AB of IT Act as activities are not genuine and many of trust is being run by management

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)

161- from the trust. After considering the above discrepancies, it is clear assessee trust is siphoning of money. Thus, it is clear that activities are not genuine and trustee are siphoning of funds. This makes trust ineligible for registration under section 12AB of IT Act as activities are not genuine and many of trust is being run by management

RAJASTHAN EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

161 taxmann.com 209(Madras)\ndated 02.04.2024. The ld.AR also relied on the ITAT Jodhpur's\norder in Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust vs. CIT(E) in\nITA No.278/JODH/2023 dated 10.11.2023. She explained that the\nld.CIT(E) has erred in treating the assessee's application as\ndelayed application.\nSubmission of ld.DR :\n3. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

Trust, because that are charitable organisation and the advance was given for educational and social purpose. Therefore no interest was charged on such advances. However, it appears that the ld. CIT(A) has not at all paid any attention to the submission. It is submitted that there can’t be any notional interest as held in the case of Shoorji

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

Bench: Him.

1,39,117. Dealing with the excess profits tax assessment, he also held that the said income was derived from the business of the appellant and hence it was liable to excess profits tax also.” 2.19. Ld. AO invoked provision of Section 68 in respect of sales. Section 68 deems non- income to be income. In the instant case