AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

charitable Trust. Rs 24,000/- Loss on RS 70,000/- house property 6.6 The bare perusal of section makes it clear that who is eligible of claiming such deduction. Thus when the language of statute is clear and unambiguous and, in such circumstances, the expert's opinion may not be used as a shelter to avoid penalty, as the explanation

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

charitable Trust. Rs 24,000/- Loss on house property RS 70,000/- 6.6 The bare perusal of section makes it clear that who is eligible of claiming such deduction. Thus when the language of statute is clear and unambiguous and, in such circumstances, the expert's opinion may not be used as a shelter to avoid penalty, as the explanation

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

charitable Trust. Rs 24,000/- Loss on house property RS 70,000/- 6.6 The bare perusal of section makes it clear that who is eligible of claiming such deduction. Thus when the language of statute is clear and unambiguous and, in such circumstances, the expert's opinion may not be used as a shelter to avoid penalty, as the explanation

RAATH VIDYAPEETH,ALWAR vs. ITO (EXMP.), WARD-ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed with no orders as to costs

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

251 of the Income Tax Act, the ld. CIT(A) has no power to set aside the issue as he enjoys coterminous powers with the AO. Hence, the ld. AR wants a direction to the AO to allow depreciation as application of income. After analysing the entire facts and circumstances and particular facts of the present case more particularly taking

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

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

Charitable Trust [2015] 58 taxmann.com 335/232 Taxman340/[2014] 369 ITR 360\n(Raj.). The Tribunal also noted that once the matter was remanded back to the CIT(E)\nthen the limitation for passing the order/decision cannot be more than the limitation\nprovided for deciding the application under section 12AA of the Act. There is no dispute\nthat

RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

251\naccumulated during the F.Y. 2012-13\nLess: Applications out of the amount 3,53,66,683 6,36,55,934\naccumulated during the F.Y. 2013-14\nTotal\n1,53,29,572\nHere it is not known either from the present application or assessment\nrecords that the assessee has filed Form No.10 within the stipulated\ntime in the prescribed form

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

PANKAJ MANI KULSHRESHTHA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(5), JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Hearing.”

Charitable Trust (Gujarat High Court) R/Tax Appeal No. 1335 of 2018 Date of 11 Sh. Panka Mani Khulshrestha vs. ITO Judgement/Order: 30/07/2019 while deciding the issue under consideration if Assesseeremained absent on more than one occasions and appeal decided on merits then whether it will be called as Ex-parte order. The Hon'ble High Court states that

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

c) meant for particular community (d) Religious Exp. are more than 5% Hence this appeal. Submission: GOA 1 : Impugned Order dt. 27.06.2024 is bad-in law : 1. The Passing of the impugned order is barred by the limitation u/s 153(3). In this connection, your kind attention is drawn thatthe order of Honb’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

c) where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing before the Assessing Officer any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal ; or (d) where the Assessing Officer has made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence relevant to any ground of appeal. (2) No evidence shall be admitted under

TIRUPATI COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

251 ITR 263. The ratio laid down in this case was that Sec.68 shall not apply on share application money. "13 We have considered the rival contentions, relevant material on record, as also the cited decisions. In 192 ITR 287 Steller Investment Ltd., Honble Delhi High Court has laid down as under: "It is evident that even

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed\nexemption u/s.11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to\nsatisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that\nthe assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of\ndonations and, therefore, the amount

JAIPUR JEWELLERY SHOW,JAIPUR vs. ACIT-DCIT CIRCLE (EXEMP.), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

charitable activity being and advancement of object of general public utility, while the profit margin is meagre, the claim of exemption ought to be extended. 4.4 It is evident that the appellant had failed to comprehend the contents and principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of AUDA (supra). The Court had categorically said that when