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)

trust\n11.\nForm 10AC under Sub clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A 20-22\nvide Unique Registration Number AAITA7176ME2021201\n12.\nForm 10A under sub clause (1) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A 23-26\nvide acknowledgement no. 586198510270921\n13.\nForm 10AB under sub clause (iii) of clause

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

section 23 Bharatpur Royal Family Religious & Ceremonial Trust Moti Mahal, Bharatpur Vs. CIT(E), Jaipur (2) which is applied to purposes other than charitable

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

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

section 12A, the concerned Commissioner/Director is not\nrequired to examine question whether the trust has actually commenced and has, in fact\ncarried on charitable activities. [Para 12]\n\n12. Its beyond our understanding what else a newly established society/trust\ncan furnish in response to the letter of Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur. Rather, observations on\ngenuineness of the trust observations, made

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)

23,35,562/-). The shares of M/s Om Metals Infra Project Ltd not an eligible asses within the meaning of provisions of section 11(5) as such it attracts provisions of section 13(1)(d)(iii) of the I.T. Act. Furthermore mere holding of shares in a company is sufficient to invoke provisions of section 13(1)(d)(iii) which

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

23) specifically provides that on dissolution the asset of the society would be merged with other society having same object and registered u/s 12AA of the Act. Thus the registration refused by CIT(E) on this ground is unjustified. 2. The Ld. CIT(E) by referring to the constitution dt. 31.03.2008 (PB 26-35) and by referring to section

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

23) specifically provides that on dissolution the asset of the society would be merged with other society having same object and registered u/s 12AA of the Act. Thus the registration refused by CIT(E) on this ground is unjustified. 2. The Ld. CIT(E) by referring to the constitution dt. 31.03.2008 (PB 26-35) and by referring to section

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

charitable object of the trust was the imparting of education which falls u/s.2(15) of the Act. The newspaper business was incidental to the attainment of the object of the trust, namely that of imparting education and the profits of the newspaper business are utilized by the trust for achieving the object of imparting education. In this case, there

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)

Section 2(15), which defines 'charitable purpose', were not brought to the notice of the court and therefore, the said order passed by the court by merely recording its ipse dixit does not help the Revenue in any manner. 23 Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority vs. CIT(E) 27. From various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court discussed hereinabove

SUNRISE SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: The Time Of Hearing.” 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

trust did not produce the books of account, bills and vouchers etc. for verification of the ld. CIT for which the ld. CIT held that the assessee society is not carrying out any charitable activities. Due to noncompliance of assessee society, the genuineness of the activities could not be verified. The ld. CIT, therefore, relying on various decisions including

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.

section 2(15) viz. ‘not involving carrying on any activity of profit’ is that when the purpose of a trust or institution is advancement of an object of general public utility, it is that object of genral public utility which must not involve carrying on of any activity for profit and not its advancement or attainment. The court observed that

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.

section 2(15) viz. ‘not involving carrying on any activity of profit’ is that when the purpose of a trust or institution is advancement of an object of general public utility, it is that object of genral public utility which must not involve carrying on of any activity for profit and not its advancement or attainment. The court observed that

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.

section 2(15) viz. ‘not involving carrying on any activity of profit’ is that when the purpose of a trust or institution is advancement of an object of general public utility, it is that object of genral public utility which must not involve carrying on of any activity for profit and not its advancement or attainment. The court observed that

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE , JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

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 or institution is to carry out object of general public utility and this is the primary or dominant purpose and not carrying on any activity for profit, ITO Vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association. the same would satisfy the requirements of section 2(15) of the Act. Here, the main object of the appellant was providing financial help

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 or institution is to carry out object of general public utility and this is the primary or dominant purpose and not carrying on any activity for profit, ITO Vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association. the same would satisfy the requirements of section 2(15) of the Act. Here, the main object of the appellant was providing financial help

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 or institution is to carry out object of general public utility and this is the primary or dominant purpose and not carrying on any activity for profit, ITO Vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association. the same would satisfy the requirements of section 2(15) of the Act. Here, the main object of the appellant was providing financial help

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)

23-10-2017 wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that :- ‘’31. In all these cases, the impugned orders were passed after the respective dates of grant of registration. Thus, we hold that subsequent grant of registration in all these cases operates retrospectively for all the relevant years under consideration." 5.The Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

23 M/s Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust vs. ITO (E) therein are charitable. The Trust was not made with the objective of providing benefit to settler or trustee of the trust. The AO without any power pointed out defects in the Trust Deed. The AO referred the Hindi Translation of the Trust Deed and not the Original Trust Deed