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

section 164(2) of the Income Tax Act reads as under- (2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

VIVEK SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION - 1,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stands

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1134 & 1135/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Vivek Shiksha Samiti Jobner Road, Kalwar, VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Exemption-1, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary

charitable institution, the provisions of section 164 (2) can only be applied and section 167B does not have any application. The appellant relies on the case of Shri Digambar Jain Mandir Trust

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RVCF TRUST-II, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Within 30 Days I.E. On Or Before 13.06.2022. In View Of The Above The Physical Appeal Was Filed On 19.05.2022 Well Before 12.06.2022 As Directed In The Said Mail.

charitable trust within the definition of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act . It is claimed that the income was passed through to the beneficiaries in accordance with the provisions of Section 161 to 164

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)

charitable trusts. I. Mere surplus does not make any institution Business Entity The Ld. CIT has also taken a note that the charges levies fixed by the authority are higher than cost, while, it is surprising to note that the authority has to ensure the development of the whole region, to provide all infrastructure facilities, civil amenities public utility services

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

SHREE RAJPUT SABHA,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

Section 12A Charitable Trust Registration of Business practices: Where assessee's primary purpose remained advancement of objects of general public utility, even if an incidental or ancillary activity for purpose of achieving main purpose was profitable in nature, denial of registration was unjustified. 150 DTR 249 Director of IT (Exemptions) Vs. Shree Nashik PanchvatiPanjrapole (Bom) (Case

PANCHAYTI DHARAMSHALA KASERAN TRUST,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Sh. Sandep Gosain & Dr. M. L. Meena

charitable activities and registered with Devasthan Vibhag under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act 1959 and since 1970, it is regularly filing its return of income. However, no details are provided whether the appellant was granted registration under section 12AA of the 6 Panchayti Dharamshala Kaseran Trust v. ITO Income Tax Act, 1961 either before the Ld. CIT appeal or before

JYOTI VIDYAPEETH TRUST,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CCIT, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Ld. Pr. Ccit For Seeking Approval U/S 10(23C)(Vi) Of The Act On 22.07.2014. On Perusal Of The Trust Deed & Other Documents Furnished In Support Of The Application, The Pr. Ccit Observed That Various Classes In The Trust Deed Are Not As Per The Provisions Of Section 10(23C)(Vi)

section 164(1). This concept of “Discretionary Trust” is applicable only on private trusts and not on Charitable Trust (appellant

GOLDEN INDIA FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD,, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 98/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Golden India Foundation AA-13, Jay Ambey Nagar, Opp. Old Jaipur Hospital, Tonk Road, Jaipur cuke Vs. The ITO Exemption- Ward Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTG 3675 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.L. Yadav, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Da

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act. c. Repayment of a debt incurred for charitable purposes by a charitabletrust and loans advanced by educational trusts are application of income: Repayment of loan taken for construction of a building by the assessee for the purpose of augmenting its funds shall qualify as income applied for charitable purposes CIT vs Janamabhoomi Press

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MAHATMA GANDHI CHARITABLE SOCIETY FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for Statistical purposes with no order as to cost

164(2) deals with the charge of tax 6 The DCIT (Exemptions) Circle – Jaipur vs Mahatama Gandhi Charitable Society for Education and Resarch, Jaipur on the income of the trust which is derived by it from the property held wholly for charitable or religious purposes. The proviso to this section

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

164 ITR 271 ITR 293 (Guj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Mad) Govindu Naidker Estate Vs. ADI 248 1TR 368 (Mad) This carry forward of deficit is statutory requirement and cannot be denied. It is humbly prayed that the deficit claimed to be carried forward for set off in the next

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

164 ITR 271 ITR 293 (Guj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Mad) Govindu Naidker Estate Vs. ADI 248 1TR 368 (Mad) This carry forward of deficit is statutory requirement and cannot be denied. It is humbly prayed that the deficit claimed to be carried forward for set off in the next

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

164 ITR 271 ITR 293 (Guj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Mad) Govindu Naidker Estate Vs. ADI 248 1TR 368 (Mad) This carry forward of deficit is statutory requirement and cannot be denied. It is humbly prayed that the deficit claimed to be carried forward for set off in the next

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

164 ITR 271 ITR 293 (Guj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Mad) Govindu Naidker Estate Vs. ADI 248 1TR 368 (Mad) This carry forward of deficit is statutory requirement and cannot be denied. It is humbly prayed that the deficit claimed to be carried forward for set off in the next

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

164 ITR 271 ITR 293 (Guj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Mad) Govindu Naidker Estate Vs. ADI 248 1TR 368 (Mad) This carry forward of deficit is statutory requirement and cannot be denied. It is humbly prayed that the deficit claimed to be carried forward for set off in the next

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. JYOTI VIDYAPEETH TRUST, JAIPUR

16. As a result, finding no merit in the appeal filed by the department, the same is hereby dismissed

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

Charitable Trust, (2014) 43 taxmann.com 300, a decision by Hon’ble Delhi High Court ; and the decision in case of Agappa Child Centre vs. CIT, (1997) 92 taxman 327, by Hon’ble Kerala High Court. Learned DR for the department has referred to the provisions of Section 11, Section 13(1)(c)(ii) and Section

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

164(2)—\nTotal amount was treated as income by invoking Section 13(1)(b) read with\nSection 11(5)—Amount said to have received as donation was added back to\nincome of assessee under Section 69A—CIT(A) affirmed view taken by\nAssessing Officer except for granting partial relief such as with regard to claim for\ncarry forward of depreciation