VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

section 80G(5) was applicable only to newly constructed trust and not to old trust, delay in filing Form No.10AB deserved to be condoned. 7. Otherwise also, CBDT vide Circular No.7/2024 dt. 25.04.2024 has extended the time for filing the application for permanent approval till 30.06.2024 whereas in earlier Circular No.6/2023 dt. 24.05.2023 the time for filing application for permanent

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)

Trust are not eligible u/s 80G(5) 2.1 The provision of section 80G(5) are as under: “80G(5) This section applies to donations to any institutions or fund referred to in sub clause (iv) of clause (a) of subsection (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable purpose and it fulfils. ” From the plain reading

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj 51/117 Sec 5, Pratap Nagar Sanganer, Jaipur cuke Vs. The CIT, Exemption Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATU 6874 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@D

section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPURTHE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

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

section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent

ALL INDIA SECURITISATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ASSOCIATION,CHITRANJAN MARG vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

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

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

5) of\nsec 80G of the Act is liable to be rejected as non-maintainable\n\n04. In view of above discussion applicant's application for\napproval u/s 80G is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected\non following grounds\n•\nApproval u/s 80G cannot be granted without registration u/s\n12AB\n•\nCommencement of activities\n\n5. Further 12AB

RAJ RISHI BHARTRIHARI MATSYA UNIVERSITY ALWAR,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALWAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed\nfor statistical purpose

Charitable Trust\n(supra). The concluding paragraph of the judgment is worth to note in this aspect,\nwhich read as under :-\n\"Be that as it may, we are here concerned whether in the absence of any\nstatutory provision to condone the delay in presenting the application under\nsection 10(23C)(vi) the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax can exercise

SUPREME BUILDESTATES PVT LTD,MADANGANJ- KISHANGARH vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

ii. Ld AO and NAFC have not appreciated that under the Income Tax Act, no restriction has been imposed for claiming deduction under Section 80G of the Act when payment has been made to the eligible entities listed in Section 80G of the Act. iii. Fetters of voluntary and involuntary nature of payments to section 80G of the income

SAMYAK GYAN PRACHAR PRASAR TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, 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 institution. In view of the above discussion, it is clear that assessee is making huge expenditure of religious nature ad violating Section 80G(5)(ii) and sub-section (5B) of Section 80G of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for approval u/s 80G. 4.2 As regards the commencement of the activities, the assessee trust

KOGTA FOUNDATION ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, KAILASH HEIGHT

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

ii) of first proviso to sub section (5) of section 80G of the Act, as not already registered under clause (i) or (iii) of first proviso to 80G(5) of the Act. Hence CIT(E) order should be made null and void and CIT(E) may be directed to grant for 80G registration and rejection/cancellation order of 80G must

KOGTA FOUNDATION ,II FLOOR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

ii) of first proviso to sub section (5) of section 80G of the Act, as not already registered under clause (i) or (iii) of first proviso to 80G(5) of the Act. Hence CIT(E) order should be made null and void and CIT(E) may be directed to grant for 80G registration and rejection/cancellation order of 80G must

PARASMAL JAIN BILASPURIYA (BARJATYA) PARMARTHIK CHARITABLE TRUST (NYAS),TONK vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

section 80G, “charitable purpose” does not include any purpose the whole or substantially the whole of which is of a religious nature. To explain the objects of the trust or to explain that the same are charitable purposes and do not include any purpose the whole or substantially the whole of which is of a religious nature, the applicant trust

PARITRUPTI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

80G allows deduction to an assessee in computing his total income in respect of donation paid to any fund or institution. However, under sub- section 5, the deduction is allowable only if such fund or institution is established in India for charitable purpose and it fulfills the following conditions:- (i) The income of the fund or institution is exempt

GO GRAM ECO FOUNDATION,GOVINDGARH TEHSIL CHOMU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

80G allows deduction to an assessee in computing his total income in respect of donation paid to any fund or institution. However, under sub-section 5, the deduction is allowable only if such fund or institution is established in India for charitable purpose and it fulfills the following conditions:- (i) The income of the fund or institution is exempt

BAREFOOT COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL,KISHANGARH vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed\nOrder pronounced in the open court on\n20/02/2024

Charitable Company under section 8 of the\nCompanies Act, 2013 and also having approval u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act for the period\nfrom AY 2022-23 to AY 2026-27. (Refer Paper Book No. 1, Page No. 28-30)\n2. That the company applied for provisional approval u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 on dated

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ii) The respondents are directed to consider the applications submitted by the\npetitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first\nproviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider\nthe same and pass orders thereon on merits\n8. Therefore, owing to extenuating circumstances beyond our control, such

RAM NIWAS MODI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off\nthereby allowing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

80G(5) filed\nthrough FORM 10B but in the following words:\n“04. In view of above discussion assessee's claim of registration section 12AB is\nliable\nto be rejected and thus being rejected on following grounds:\n• Registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959.\n• Benefited to interested persons.\n8\nITA No. 118 & 779/JPR/2025\nRam Niwas Modi Charitable Society

TREHAN SEVA BHARTI CHARITABLE TRUST,ALWAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

80G.\n\n2. The Ld. CIT(E) has further erred on facts and in law in cancelling the\nprovisional approval granted by CIT under clause (iv) of first proviso to section\n80G(5) of IT Act, 1961.\n\n3. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal.\n\n4. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as" 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent