MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 68 converts non- income into income and has no application where income is already offered for tax. 13 Mahesh Kumar Gupta vs ACIT, Circle-04, Jaipur 4.12. Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152, considered a situation where the assessee, a charitable trust

MANDIR SHREE BHAIRAV JI TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

68). “ Moreover, the assessee-trust has carried on other charitable activities in the nature of relief of poor. The Vedic Scholars were identified and felicitated irrespective of their caste, creed or religion and the assessee is allowed registration under section

NITIN VIJAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Section 68 creates deeming fictions, whereby certain amounts which are not\nconsidered as income by the assessee, are deemed to be income of the\nassessee. A deeming fiction of income cannot apply to an item which is\nalready treated as income by the assessee himself. The question of deeming\nan item to be income can only arise if the item

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

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

68,89,419/- i.e 40,33,412/- on account of construction expenses and added in total income of the assessee. without considering the fact that it was never claimed by the assessee appellant. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. Ld. Lower Authority grossly erred in confirming the disallowance

SANDEEP SETHI ,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

68 or Section 69 converts non-income into income and has no application where income is already offered for tax.Section 69 is reproduced below:- “Where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income

RAJIV NIGOTIYA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

68 or Section 69 converts non-income into income and has no application where income is already offered for tax.Section 69 is reproduced below:- “Where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

Section 68 converts non-income into income and has no application where income is already offered for tax. 2.21. Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152, considered a situation where the assessee, a charitable trust

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.

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

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.

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

AAGAZ SAMAJIK VIKAS SANSTHA ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.S.Seethalakshmi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.809 & 810/Jpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : - Aagaz Samajik Vikas The Commissioner Of Sanstha, V Income Tax, 45A/69, Near Office Lane, S Exemption, Jaipur. Behind Rainbow Jewellers, Jagdish Colony, Ramgarh Mode, Jaipur – 302002. Pan: Aaeaa5124E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ajey Malik – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Jaipur Both Dated 25.02.2023. The Assessee In Ita No.809/Jpr/2023 Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal :

68. The assessees had argued that since they were registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 or were trusts duly registered, they could not be compelled to comply with state laws as a condition for consideration of their application as charitable institutions, under Section

AAGAZ SAMAJIK VIKAS SANSTHA ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.S.Seethalakshmi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.809 & 810/Jpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : - Aagaz Samajik Vikas The Commissioner Of Sanstha, V Income Tax, 45A/69, Near Office Lane, S Exemption, Jaipur. Behind Rainbow Jewellers, Jagdish Colony, Ramgarh Mode, Jaipur – 302002. Pan: Aaeaa5124E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ajey Malik – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Jaipur Both Dated 25.02.2023. The Assessee In Ita No.809/Jpr/2023 Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal :

68. The assessees had argued that since they were registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 or were trusts duly registered, they could not be compelled to comply with state laws as a condition for consideration of their application as charitable institutions, under Section

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)

section 32 is not applicable on charitable trusts. 2. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) Ld. CIT upheld the decision of ld. AO stating that assessment made by ld. AO is conclusive. 3. SUBMISSION: 3.1. It is submitted that claim for depreciation is very much available to charitable trusts also. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements wherein

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

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 166 and explain that the assessee trust is a revocable trust and in para 2 of the CBDT Circular explain that ‘option once’ that it will not be opened to the Income-tax Officer to assess the same income for that assessment year in the hands of the other person i.e. the beneficiary or the trustee

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)

68 of Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act 1959 and the Jodhpur Development Act, explain that the UIT / JDA have been entrusted by the State Government with the control or management of “Local Fund” and therefore, it clearly qualifies to be the local authority as defined in section 10(20) of I.T. Act 1961. These provisions also reveal that

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:

68 of Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act 1959 and the Jodhpur Development Act, explain that the UIT / JDA have been entrusted by the State Government with the control or management of “Local Fund” and therefore, it clearly qualifies to be the local authority as defined in section 10(20) of I.T. Act 1961. These provisions also reveal that

GURUKUL SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Jpr/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 To 2024-25 Gurukul Shkshan Sansthan, The Commissioner Of 5, Nindar Moad, Harmada, V Income Jaipur – 302013. S Tax(Exemption), Pan: Aacag8325K Jaipur. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Arvind Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 03/07/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Jaipur Rejecting Assessee’S Application For Registration U/Sec.12Ab Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. That The Ld Cit(Exemption)/A.O. Has Rejected Application For Registration Under Section 12Ab(1)(B)(Ii)(B) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Gurukul Shikshan Sansthan [A]

Charitable Institutions and Societies which may be regulated by other state laws have to comply with them. The relevant paragraph 68, 69 and 70 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision is reproduced here as under : “67. In the event of failure to comply with Section 43(1), or failure to intimate changes in the trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

charitable institution is the application of funds and not the colour of the contributions it was held, "The AD based his conclusion on the presumption that the contribution to development fee was not a voluntary contribution the question whether the donations were voluntary or not becomes irrelevant and what becomes relevant is the application of such contributions for the objections