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 with effect the A.Y. 2009-10 and onwards. The learned assessing officer disallowed the benefit of exemption to the appellant in the assessment order on the ground that the appellant has violated the investment norms as provided under the four for the trust. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant is having investment in equity shares

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 - Registration of [Conditions precedent] - Whether it is incumbent upon\nCommissioner to decide issue of granting or decline of registration only within statutory\npreconditions as laid down under section

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

1)(d)\nWhether since Commissioner did not show that objects of assessee were not charitable,\norder denying registration was not justified - Held, yes [In favour of assessee]\nHon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in the case of PIMS\nMedical & Education Charitable Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-II,\nChandigarh [2013] 31 taxmann.com 371 (Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 56

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.

1) of section 160 are liable as representative assessee or any part thereof shall be deemed as being not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person unless the person on whose behalf or for whose benefit such income or such part thereof is receivable during the previous year is expressly stated in the order

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

M/S WHOLESALE CLOTH MERCHANT,KOTA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

Charitable Trust vs. DCIT (2019) 6 TMI 595 (Cochin) 4. Application of funds deemed to have been made for the benefit of specified person Section 13(2): In some earlier years there was a miss happening with the assessee association that his president deliberately withdraw cash from association's bank account for his personal use in the name of other

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

1,56,76.616/- ), which shows that coaching is the pre-dominant activity of the applicant. Therefore, the applicant is carrying out activities (Coaching) and such coaching activities cannot be termed as charitable activities since these activities are being run on commercial lines and also do not qualify as "education" as contemplated under the head "education" in Sec. 2(15), which

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)

1,2,4,5,6: The order passed is bad in law Brief Facts: The assessee is a registered charitable trust under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (refer clause (iv) PB 4). The trust is established on dt.28- 11-1963 and the first trust deed is enclosed at PB 56-62. The trust deed was modified in the year

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

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

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Section 127 1-6 1 S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 7-21 2 A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 22-32 Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy 3 (2013) 12 SCC 649 Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 33-35 4 36-44 5 Union of India

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Section 127 1-6 1 S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 7-21 2 A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 22-32 Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy 3 (2013) 12 SCC 649 Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 33-35 4 36-44 5 Union of India

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Section 127 1-6 1 S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 7-21 2 A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 22-32 Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy 3 (2013) 12 SCC 649 Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 33-35 4 36-44 5 Union of India

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Section 127 1-6 1 S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 7-21 2 A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 22-32 Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy 3 (2013) 12 SCC 649 Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 33-35 4 36-44 5 Union of India

ST. WILFRED EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR

charitable education purposes and therefore the activities of the assessee society are not genuine. 10. The ld CIT DR has heavily relied on the aforesaid findings of the ld Pr.CIT. and submitted that fees have been collected in cash by the assessee society from its students and given that the same was not recorded in its books of account

ST. WILFRED EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR

charitable education purposes and therefore the activities of the assessee society are not genuine. 10. The ld CIT DR has heavily relied on the aforesaid findings of the ld Pr.CIT. and submitted that fees have been collected in cash by the assessee society from its students and given that the same was not recorded in its books of account

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

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

1,2,4,5,6: The order passed is bad in law\nBrief Facts: The assessee is a registered charitable trust under the Rajasthan\nPublic Trust Act, 1959 (refer clause (iv) PB 4). The trust is established on dt.28-\n11-1963 and the first trust deed is enclosed at PB 56-62.\nThe trust deed was modified in the year