ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

56 SOT 522\n(Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 150 TTJ 891 (Chandigarh - Trib.)[30-10-2012] observed:\nSection 12A, read with section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or\nreligious trust

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Charitable Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-II,\nChandigarh [2013] 31 taxmann.com 371 (Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 56 SOT 522\n(Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 150 TTJ 891 (Chandigarh - Trib.)[30-10-2012] observed:\nSection 12A, read with section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nCharitable or\nreligious trust

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

section 11, which only allows income from trust property and voluntary\ncontribution as exempt.\n2. Further hiring of people on job basis is also against the mandate given in trust deep,\nwhich requires only through community participation. I am afraid that if giving job to\npeople is construed as community participation, would make every trust deed shattered.\nThus, in light

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\nu/s.2(15) of the Act. The newspaper business was incidental to the attainment\nof the object of the trust, namely that of imparting education and the profits of\nthe newspaper business are utilized by the trust for achieving the object of\nimparting education. In this case, there

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. 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

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

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

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

section\n11 (2) and 11(1)(a) of the\nAct\n33,50,772/-\n33,50,772/-\n5.\nUnverifiable Creditors\n16,75,286/-\n16,75,286/-\n6.\n15% of Construction\nExpenses\n1,20,00,440/-\n1,20,00,440/-\n7.\nDisallowance of Rs\n3,69,567 out of total\nexpenses

SHREE RAJPUT SABHA,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 2(15) – Not a ground\nspecified in statute for cancellation of registration Income Tax Act, 1961, ss. 2(15),\nfirst proviso, 12AA(3)\nCIT vs Jodhpur Development Authority 287 CTR 473 (Raj.)/ 139 DTR 1\nCharitable trust Registration under s. 12A - Charitable purpose of planning and\ndevelopment of city vis-a-vis earning of profit - Predominant object

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN ATIKSHAYA KESHTRA,PADAMPUA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1, KAILASH HEIGHTS

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Charitable Trust [240 ITR 513] (Cal)  CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) [131 Taxman 386](Bom)  CIT vs. ShethManilalRancchoddasVishramBhawan Trust ]198 ITR 598] (Guj)  CIT vs. Raipur Pallottine Society [180 ITR 579] (MP)  CIT vs. Ganga Charity Trust Fund [162 ITR 612] (Guj)  CIT vs. Indian Jute Mills Association [134 ITR 68] (Cal)  Director of Income Tax (Exemption

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.

section 160 of the Income Tax Act, which is not the income according to the trust deed and the kind of the activity is not in the nature of trust where the entire fund is not eligible and the income is taxable in the hands of the uncertain income whether it is generated, but going through the organized and averment

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

56-62. The trust deed was modified in the year 2018 and the revised instrument dt.12-3- 2018 is placed at PB 63-69. The assessee was also duly registered u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act since 10- 5-2002 and a copy of the certificate u/s 12A is placed at PB 52. Later the assessee was again issued registration

JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

Section 164 (2) of the Act and the Court decision referred above. Thus Ground No. 1 is restored to file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5.1 In Ground No. 2, the assessee is aggrieved that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming

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)

section 143(3)/144 of the Income Tax Act [Here in after referred as “Act” ], by the DCIT(Exemption), Circle, Jaipur. ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 Jodhpur Development Authority 2. Since, the facts of both the cases are identical, we have heard these cases together and passing the order together. The facts and grounds are taken from the folder of Jodhpur

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:

section 143(3)/144 of the Income Tax Act [Here in after referred as “Act” ], by the DCIT(Exemption), Circle, Jaipur. ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 Jodhpur Development Authority 2. Since, the facts of both the cases are identical, we have heard these cases together and passing the order together. The facts and grounds are taken from the folder of Jodhpur

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

section 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] both dated 19.07.2024 respectively.\n\nITA No. 1184 & 1185/JP/2024\nAkhil Bharatvarshiya Papeek Ashram Trust\n2.1 In ITA No. 1184/JP/2024 the assessee has raised the following grounds: -\n1. The order passed by Id. CIT Exemption in form no. 10AD is bad in law as well

JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY SOCIETY FOR SOCIAL WELFARE,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

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

section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act on the ground that the appellant is not registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and further on the ground that the activities of the appellant are not genuine+. In this regard, we humbly submit as under: With Regard to Registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959: 1. The appellant applied

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

56,54,784/- as taxable income of assessee and taxed life membership fees of Rs. 26,41,000/- holding it as normal income and disallowed expenses totaling to Rs. 78,681/-. The present appeal is against said denial of exemption u/s 11 & 12 and subjecting to tax the entire surplus of association as taxable and other additions so made

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SHEKSHANIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

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

Charitable or religious trust - Exemption of income from property held under (Form no. 10) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-trust filed audit report inform no. 10B and sought for claim of accumulation of income under section 11(2) -Assessing Officer rejected said claim on grounds that Form 10 was not filed - Thereafter, Form 10 was filed beyond due date along