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

58% of the salary of the current year i.eRs\n4,57,76,644 is not for the purpose of activities of the trust and excessive and thus\ndisallowable. This amount also covers excess and unreasonable salary paid to\nspecified persons as above. d. It is further noticed that as per copies of accounts of\nvarious expenses, a substantial part

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)

4. Submissions made before CIT(E) dated 27.07.2023 51-57 5. Copy of Balance Sheet and Income & Expenditure Account for 58-63 13 Bhiwadi Integrated Development Authority vs. CIT(E) the FY 2019-20 to 2021-22 6. Order of Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT vs. 64-113 Surat Art Silk Cloth manufacturers Association 7. Order

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

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 (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

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.\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

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:

4 of Rajasthan Local Fund Audit Act 1954 provide that the UIT / JDA is a local authority and is governed by the law applicable to such local authorities. Section 51 and 58 of JDA Act 2009 defining the funds of the authority and showing that the JDA is entrusted with the control and management of “Local Fund”. 1.18. The following

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)

4 of Rajasthan Local Fund Audit Act 1954 provide that the UIT / JDA is a local authority and is governed by the law applicable to such local authorities. Section 51 and 58 of JDA Act 2009 defining the funds of the authority and showing that the JDA is entrusted with the control and management of “Local Fund”. 1.18. The following

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)

58- 68. It is noted that the AO at Page 7 of the assessment order held that donation paid to other trust is not allowable since exemption u/s 11 is denied. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) at Page 18 Para 11.2 of its order held that 6.3 assessee has not given the details as to why the donation