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.

164. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), where any income in respect of which the persons mentioned in clauses (iii) and (iv) of sub- section (1) of section 160 are liable as representative assessees or any part thereof is not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person or where

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 or religious purposes, or which is of the nature referred to in sub-clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, or which is of the nature referred to in sub-section (4A) of section 11, tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt Vivek Shiksha Samiti vs. ITO (E) under section

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)

1) When all schemes sanctioned under this Act have been executed or have been so far executed as to render the continued existence of the Trust, in the opinion of the State 6 Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority vs. CIT(E) Government, unnecessary, the State Government may by notification declare that the Trust shall be dissolved from such date

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

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

SCHOLAR'S EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,602-A, TRIMURTY DAVE APARTMENT, JAI SINGH HIGHWAY MARG, BANI PARK, JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: The Cit(A), The Power Exercised By Him U/S 263 For Disallowing The Donation Paid To Other Society Would Not Fall In The Ambit Of Section 263. 3. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Finding Given By Ld. Cit That Once Exemption U/S 11 Is Withdrawn, Not Disallowing The Scholar’S Education Trust Of India Vs. Cit(E)

164(2) deals with the charge of tax on the income of the Scholar’S Education Trust of India vs. CIT(E) trust which is derived by it from the property held wholly for charitable or religious purpose. The proviso to this section which is relevant for the present purpose reads as under:- “Provided that in a case where

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

iv) to the assessee for assessment year 2007-08 onwards. However, consequent as the amendment of Section 2(15) the exemption was withdrawn. On a writ petition for quashing the order and also the first proviso to Section 2(15) Held, allowing the petition that it was clear from the faces of the case that profit making

SAMIKSHA ROONGTA BENEFIT TRUST,RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR vs. ITO , ITO WARD, KOTA

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

164. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), where any income in respect of which the persons mentioned in clauses (iii) and (iv) of sub-section (1) of section 160 are liable as representative assessees or any part thereof is not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person or where

SAMIKSHA ROONGTA BENEFIT TRUST,RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR vs. ITO, ITO WARD KOTA

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

164. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), where any income in respect of which the persons mentioned in clauses (iii) and (iv) of sub-section (1) of section 160 are liable as representative assessees or any part thereof is not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person or where

SAKSHI ROONGTA BENEFIT TRUST,RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), KOTA

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

164. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), where any income in respect of which the persons mentioned in clauses (iii) and (iv) of sub-section (1) of section 160 are liable as representative assessees or any part thereof is not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person or where

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)

iv. Digember Jain Society for Child Welfare(2010) 329 ITR 459 (Delhi) v. Harf Charitable Trust (REGD.) (2015) 376 ITR 0110 (P&H) Appellant Trust is not involved in any activity other than education. No contrary finding is there in the Order of ld. Pr. CCIT or in any of the assessment orders u/s 143(3). B) Trustees have derived

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

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

164 1,977 PB-I, Pg. :32-35 ITA 185 to 190/JP/2016 6 Kranti Mahila Manch & Ors two assessees Vs. CIT(E) CMM 155 1,863 PB-I, Pg.: 22-24 JMM 151 1,758 PB-II, Pg. : 15-17 1.1.iii The Trust always motivates poor women to form SHGs. 1.1.iv When these women are empowered, educated and trained vocationally

M/S BHAGIRATH SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (E), WARD-1, JAIPUR

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

1, the ld AR submitted that briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1958. It is engaged in imparting education among the different sections of the society and currently running three educational institutions, i.e. B.S.S. college of technical education, B.S.S. institute of medical science and B.S.S. college of management & technology