SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

Charitable Trust (2022) 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/(2023) 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31.10.2022] x x x x Dr. S.C. Gupta v. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252 (Allahabad) x x x x Bachittar Singh vs CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana) x x x x CIT vs. Hotel Meriya [2010] 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala)/(2011) 332 ITR 537 (Kerala

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SH. TARA CHAND GUPTA, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

Charitable Trust (2022) 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/(2023) 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31.10.2022] x x x x Dr. S.C. Gupta v. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252 (Allahabad) x x x x Bachittar Singh vs CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana) x x x x CIT vs. Hotel Meriya [2010] 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala)/(2011) 332 ITR 537 (Kerala

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

unexplained and are non-genuine in\nnature. Further this infringement tantamount to income of the trust been applied by the\nassessee trust other than for the objects of the trust and thus is in violation of objects of\nthe trust.\n8.6 During proceedings, on going through financial statements of the F.Y. 2016-17 it was\nalso observed that the assessee

VIVEKANDA SHIKSHA SAMITI,PALWAS ROAD, SIKAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

charitable society with the\nmain object of carrying out educational activities. A search and seizure action u/s\n132 was carried out on the members of Prince Group, Sikar on 10/03/2018 of\nwhich assessee is one of the entity. In response to notice u/s 153C, the appellant\nfiled its return of income declaring total income

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

Charitable Trust [2022] 144\ntaxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31-10-2022]\nX\nX\nX\nX\nDr. S.C. Gupta v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2001] 118 Taxman 252\n(Allahabad)\nX\nX\nX\nX\nBachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana)\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCIT vs. Hotel Meriya (2010) 195 Taxman

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

Charitable Trust [2022] 144\ntaxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31-10-2022]\nX\nX\nX\nX\nDr. S.C. Gupta v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2001] 118 Taxman 252\n(Allahabad)\nX\nX\nX\nBachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana)\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCIT vs. Hotel Meriya (2010) 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala

YUWAM EDUCATION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Charitable Trust [2022] 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras) [31-10-2022] x x x x Dr. S.C. Gupta vs. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252 (Allahabad) x x x x Bachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana] x x x x CIT v. Hotel Mariya [2010] 195 taxman 459 (Kerala

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)

investments may be deemed to be the income of the assessee of such financial year.” B.3. 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, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed exemption u/s. 11. The Assessing Officer

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)

investments may be deemed to be the income of the assessee of such financial year.” B.3. 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, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed exemption u/s. 11. The Assessing Officer

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

Charitable Trust [2022] 144\ntaxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31-10-2022]\nX\nX\nX\nX\nDr. S.C. Gupta v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2001] 118 Taxman 252\n(Allahabad)\nX\nX\nX\nBachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana)\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCIT vs. Hotel Meriya (2010) 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

Charitable Trust [2022] 144\ntaxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras)[31-10-2022]\nX\nX\nX\nX\nDr. S.C. Gupta v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2001] 118 Taxman 252\n(Allahabad)\nX\nX\nX\nBachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana)\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCIT vs. Hotel Meriya (2010) 195 Taxman 459 (Kerala

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 :

Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC, Jodhpur) 143-156 15 Vishal Darshanlal Talreja v. PCIT R/SCA/1841/2025 Shree Ram Vessel Scrap P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 355 ITR 255 157-176 16 177-191 17 Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha v. ITO (ITAT Jaipur) (B) Case laws on Revenue Loss 192-193 18 Suraj Bhan Oil(P.)LTD V.DCIT[2022] 141 taxmann.com

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 :

Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC, Jodhpur) 143-156 15 Vishal Darshanlal Talreja v. PCIT R/SCA/1841/2025 Shree Ram Vessel Scrap P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 355 ITR 255 157-176 16 177-191 17 Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha v. ITO (ITAT Jaipur) (B) Case laws on Revenue Loss 192-193 18 Suraj Bhan Oil(P.)LTD V.DCIT[2022] 141 taxmann.com

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 :

Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC, Jodhpur) 143-156 15 Vishal Darshanlal Talreja v. PCIT R/SCA/1841/2025 Shree Ram Vessel Scrap P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 355 ITR 255 157-176 16 177-191 17 Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha v. ITO (ITAT Jaipur) (B) Case laws on Revenue Loss 192-193 18 Suraj Bhan Oil(P.)LTD V.DCIT[2022] 141 taxmann.com

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 :

Charitable Trust v. DCIT (Raj HC, Jodhpur) 143-156 15 Vishal Darshanlal Talreja v. PCIT R/SCA/1841/2025 Shree Ram Vessel Scrap P. Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 355 ITR 255 157-176 16 177-191 17 Pankaj Mani Kulshreshtha v. ITO (ITAT Jaipur) (B) Case laws on Revenue Loss 192-193 18 Suraj Bhan Oil(P.)LTD V.DCIT[2022] 141 taxmann.com

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)

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed exemption u/s. 11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to satisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that the assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of donations and, therefore, the amount

KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained investment u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961 on this count. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in confirming finding recorded by the ld. AO that out of 22 KT gold jewellery and gold bar found at the time of search

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

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

investment in the property which was under the jurisdiction\nof the ITO 1(2) and later on communication u/s 127 was made with the assessee\nbut no response from the side of the assessee. The assessee had an opportunity\nfor more than 1 year to raise the issue for transfer of PAN but assessee had not\nobjected. The transfer

MAHENDRA SINGH NARUKA,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesseein ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 204 & 205/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri Mahendra Singh Naruka B-536, J.D.A. Colony Malivya Nagar, Jaipur 302 017 अपीलार्थी / Appellant स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABUPN 1656 J बनाम Vs. The ACIT Central Circle-3 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निधर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri S.R. Sharma, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh

Charitable Trust vs. ITO (Supra), the Hon’ble Madras High Court has condoned the delay of 1631 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(A) refusing registration u/s 12AA of the Act. In that case, the Hon’ble High Court has held that in dealing with the matter, not only the period