M/S. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ADD.CIT. RANGE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN CRICEKT ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

trust carries on the business of selling and supplying goods so as to fall within the meaning of “dealer” under section 2(11) of the Act. No doubts, the definition of “business” given in section 2(5A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

BHARATPUR ROYAL FAMILY RELIGIOUS & CEREMONIAL TRUST,BHARATPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, we upheld the order of the ld PCIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 in setting aside the order so passed by the AO and the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed

17. It was submitted by the ld CIT/DR that it is obvious from the above accounts that the trust, prior to registration was not receiving any public donations, whereas after registration it is receiving donations, which is another indicator that the trust was indeed a private religious trust before the said amendments were carried out in the trust deed

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 or religious purposes and the income in form voluntary contribution with the specific directions that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust or 17 Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority vs. CIT(E) institution in the manner and to the extent specified shall not be included in the total income of the previous year. Sub-section (2

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 2

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

17,30,356/- AR filed that this amount is utilized as revenue expenditure. The remaining amount is claimed exempted u/s 11(2) and 11(1)(a) of the Act which is not allowable. The Trust is a public charitable trust and mainly formed for the upliftment of the cloth merchants of the city but fund of trust was utilized

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

Trust the case falls under the category of last limb of charitable purpose defined in section 2(15) i.e. advancement of any other object of general public utility. 4.4 This amendment was applicable for A.Y. 2009-10. During this year from sale of land alone income was Rs. 63,15,20,000/ Since receipt from trading/business/ commercial activities were more

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

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

Trust the case falls under the category of last limb of charitable purpose defined in section 2(15) i.e. advancement of any other object of general public utility. 4.4 This amendment was applicable for A.Y. 2009-10. During this year from sale of land alone income was Rs. 63,15,20,000/ Since receipt from trading/business/ commercial activities were more

ALL INDIA SECURITISATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ASSOCIATION,CHITRANJAN MARG vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

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

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

2 of CIT Order\n\nThe CIT states that \" In the absence of registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, assessee is\nnot eligible for registration u/s 12AB.\"\n\nThe assessee trust is a charitable trust duly registered with Sub- Registrar, Jaipur V vide registration\nendorsement serial number 2007397010949 on dated 20.07.2007 vide PB No.1-17. Further the trust\namended

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

17 OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION VS ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD -1 , JAIPUR jdugement of ITAT and High Court on same issue in assessee’s own case in preceding assessment years. 3.1 Apropos Ground No. 2 to 4 of the assessee, the facts as emerges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) are as under:- ‘’5.2 I have considered the facts

TREHAN SEVA BHARTI CHARITABLE TRUST,ALWAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

17 of the RPT Act, 1959, appropriate action\ncan be taken and against the trustees of the trust. But this issue can't be a hurdle\nin getting registration before the Income Tax Department u/s.12AB of the Act.\n\n9. In view of discussion (supra), we do not find any force in the findings of the\nLd. CIT (E), Jaipur

MANDIR SHREE BHAIRAV JI TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

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

17(P&H) wherein the principle as laid down as above was accepted. Hence Assessee trust should be treated as Charitable Trust instead of Religious Trust. 10 Mandir Shree Bhairav Ji Trust vs. CIT Exemption Also recently decided on 9.1.2013 by Hon’ble ITAT C” BENCH : BANGALORE vide ITA Nos.1082, 1083/Bang/2022 in case of Shri Shruthiparampara Gurukulam vs. ITO,Ward

MSB EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. CIT(E) JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, this last objection also no more stands on its legs

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarmsb Educational Society, Plot No. 1, Burhani Park, Ward No. 1, Ramnagar Nanta, Kota 324 008 Pan No. Aaqam 8644P ...... Appellant Vs.

2 MSB Educational Society assessee trust is not registered with the RPT Act, 1959 and the concerned officials under the RPT Act, 1959 deems it necessary to get the entity registered under section 17 of the RPT Act, 1959, appropriate action can be taken against the trustees of the trust. But this issue can’t be a hurdle in getting

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

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

section 2(15) is applicable in the instant case. As per the Assessing officer, the activities of the assessee corporation are commercial in ITA Nos. 885 & 886/JP/2018 Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur 17 nature for the reason that it is running buses and charging fare from the passengers and it is not providing free services

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

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

section 2(15) is applicable in the instant case. As per the Assessing officer, the activities of the assessee corporation are commercial in ITA Nos. 885 & 886/JP/2018 Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur 17 nature for the reason that it is running buses and charging fare from the passengers and it is not providing free services