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

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

charitable in nature and whether the activities which the Trust proposed to carry\non are genuine in the sense that they are in line with the objects of the Trust. In contrast, the\nposition would be different where the Commissioner proposes to cancel the registration of a\nTrust under sub-section (3) of section 12AA. There the Commissioner would

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

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

25 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, taking such a pedantic and narrow approach, it cannot be said that character of the Charitable Trust is lost if one particular expenditure is made for repair and renovation of Lord Vishnu's temple and that too by way of contribution to another trust. A perusal of the trust deed of the petitioner

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

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

25 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, taking such a pedantic and narrow approach, it cannot be said that character of the Charitable Trust is lost if one particular expenditure is made for repair and renovation of Lord Vishnu's temple and that too by way of contribution to another trust. A perusal of the trust deed of the petitioner

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)

Section 11 of the Act – Decided against Revenue. b. In Gurdaya Berlia Charitable Trust v (Fifth ITO) [1990] 34 ITD 489 (Bombay)[11-06- 1990] the Tribunal observed that only the income from unapproved investment would be taxable at the 'maximum marginal rate while the rest of the income would be exempt. c. In DCIT vs. Sheth Waded Gagalbhai Foundation

SHRI MERH KSHTRIYA SABHA,AJMER vs. CIT(APPEALS), DELHI

section 115BBC\".\n(9) The procedure for collection of funds by such a charitable institution was explained\nthat it is a case of \"CHARITABLE INSTITUTION\" & to raise funds for objects of\ntrust, all office bearers are granted \"RECEIPT BOOK\" to collect the funds & to persue\nthe masses to get aware of objects of trust, charity cause & to contribute generously.\nThus

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)

25. In Lucknow Development Authority's case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: "29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activities

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 (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.

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

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.

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

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.

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

charitable in nature. The activities are\ncarried out as per its objects. There is no infringement of\nany of the provisions contained in section 11(5) and 13.\nThe provisions of section 12AA(3) for cancellation/\nwithdrawal of registration granted to it with effect from 11-\n2-1998 under section 12A are not retrospective and\ntherefore, the impugned order

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

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

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

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

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

25. In Lukhnow Development Authority’s case (supra), while examining the question regarding applicability o proviso to Section 2(15), Allahabad High Court observed: “29. For the applicability of proviso to Section 2(15), the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with intention to make profit. Where the trust is carrying out its activates

RAM NIWAS MODI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off\nthereby allowing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Charitable Trust Reported in (2014) 90 CCH 0209 (RAJ. HC)(DC 30-32).\nHence, such allegations may be relevant while making the Assessment of a given year\nwhen the AO is empowered to deny or allow the benefit of S. 11 and 12 r/w S.12A of the\nAct.\n1.2Firstly, such aspect should not have been considered

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

25 taxmann.com 124 (Punjab &\nHaryana)/[2012] 344 ITR 358 (Punjab & Haryana) [13-09-2010] examined\nthis issue. Head notes of this decision are as under-\n\n\"Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Income escaping assessment\nGeneral -Assessment year 2001-02 In reassessment, Assessing Officer can\nmake addition even on ground on which reassessment notice might not have