RAWAT BAL VIDHA NIKETAN SAMITTEE,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

charitable purposes.\nFurther the trust has claimed a high amount of salary in the current year, which is\nexcessive and disallowable. Additionally, heavy amounts of rent have been paid to\nspecified persons, but there is no record of whether the properties were actually\nused by the trust or if the payments were reasonable. The trust also owns luxury\nvehicles that

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

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)

trusts. I. Mere surplus does not make any institution Business Entity The Ld. CIT has also taken a note that the charges levies fixed by the authority are higher than cost, while, it is surprising to note that the authority has to ensure the development of the whole region, to provide all infrastructure facilities, civil amenities public utility services, while

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.

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax, ignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee was following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income. 6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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.

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax, ignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee was following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income. 6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

58,000/- received on account of Niyaman of Agriculture land and Urban Tax,\nignoring the fact that amount was not actually paid during the year and assessee\nwas following cash system of accounting and same has not been declared as income.\n\n8\n6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) has justified in deletion of addition of amount

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

Charitable Institutions [2014] 363 ITR 230 (Kern),, only the income from such investment or deposit, which has been made in violation of section 11(5) of the Act, that is liable to be taxed and violation of section 13(1)(d) does not result in denial of exemption under section 11 to the total income of the assessee trust

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)

Charitable Trust. It is a trust registered u/s 12AA of the Act w.e.f. 17.11.2006 (PB 69). It is regularly filing its return of income. Copy of return and financial statements of the trust is at PB 58- 68. It is noted that the AO at Page 7 of the assessment order held that donation paid to other trust

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:

58 of JDA Act provides that accounts of JDA shall be subject to audit by Local Fund Audit in accordance with Rajasthan Local Fund Audit Act. Section 79 provides that recovery of any amount payable to JDA can be recovered as “Arrears of land revenue”. Section 85 of JDA Act provides that JDA shall exercise its powers and perform

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)

58 of JDA Act provides that accounts of JDA shall be subject to audit by Local Fund Audit in accordance with Rajasthan Local Fund Audit Act. Section 79 provides that recovery of any amount payable to JDA can be recovered as “Arrears of land revenue”. Section 85 of JDA Act provides that JDA shall exercise its powers and perform