M.S. MODI AND SONS ,JAIPUR vs. THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY, DELHI

10A of the Income Tax Act. In Form 56P filed for A.Y. 2009-10 (APB 07-09), date of commencement of manufacture was mentioned as "17 October 2008" and "Number of consecutive year for which the deduction is claimed was mentioned as "First" Afterwards, appellant claimed deduction u/s 10AA in subsequent assessment years i.e. from A.Y. 2010-11 and till

SHIV KUMAR SUSHIL KUMAR TEA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

delay can be condoned. Further, as rightly held by the learned CIT (A), the Courts have held that due date for furnishing return of income as per section 139(1) is subject to extended period provided u/s 139(4). In view of this reason also, the order of CIT (A) is to be upheld." (e) That for these and some

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST KOTA,KOTA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

section 12(A)(a) covers “relief of the poor, education, medical relief and advancement of any other object of general public utility” and UIT, Kota also applying all its receipts for the similar purposes of general public utility only under the direct control of Ministry of Urban Development. Therefore, kindly condone the delay in filling of form no. 10A

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of six months from commencement of its activities. Since the assessee required to file an application in Form No. 10AB u/s clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of sec. 80G of the Act within the time period of at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional approval or within six months

RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY,KOTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

10A for registration U/s 12A on 26.05.2017 and sought registration with retrospective from 31.12.2005. The ld. CIT(E) has granted registration w.e.f. 01.04.2017 i.e. 1st day of the financial year in which the application was submitted. The ld. AR has submitted that the assessee is having a good case on merits as the assessee was earlier eligible for exemption

M/S BALAJI CHARITABLE TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 39/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :...................... M/S Balaji Charitable Trust, Cuke Cit(Exemptions), Vs. 117, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaatb 2683 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Anant Kasliwal (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 14/03/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(Exemptions), Jaipur Dated 23/03/2021 Passed U/S 80G(5)(Vi) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised.

10A, filed on the same date. 3. Because, the order impugned, unless withdrawn, shall result in gross injustice to the petitioner as also its donors, without there being any deficiency/violation in the working of the humble appellant trust. The humble appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal to add, to alter, amend or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds

SHRI BHANWAR LAL KHICHI,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay. 5. As regards the matter in appeal, we note that the same is against order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act. At the outset, in this case, Ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the notice to the assessee u/s. 263 of the Act in these case, was issued by letter dated

ZILA PARYAWARN SUDHAR SAMITI,JHUNJHUNU vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay in filing the appeal is allowed. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(Exemptions), Jaipur has erred in withdrawing the registration u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(Exemptions) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary

BLOSSOM,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in filing Form No. 10A/10AB, as the same could not be filed in such cases within the last extended date, i.e.. 30.09.2023. 3. On consideration of the matter, with a view to avoid and mitigate genuine hardship in such cases, the Board, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119 of the Act, hereby extends

RADHEY SHYAM MANDIR TRUST,JHALAWAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

delay of 15 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 5. The assessee raised the following ground of appeal:- “1. The ld. CIT(E), Jaipur erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in denying registration sought u/s 12AA(1)(a) of the Act. Such denial being contrary to the law provisions

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of 796 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALA JI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of 796 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of 796 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of 796 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like

THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD ,THIKARIYA vs. AO CPCITO WARD SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

condone the delay, then your honoe is also having the power being higher forum then to PCIT. 10 ITA NO.772/JP/2023 THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD under section 80-IA or any other section of Chapter VI A, assessee should have filed return of income under section 139(1) and even if it did not make claim for deduction

GREETING HANDS FOR ABANDONED RESCUES TRUST,AJMER vs. ITO WARD - 2(1), AJMER

In the result, bunch of four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

delay of nine days in filing the Greeting Hands for Abandoned Rescues Trust vs. ITO appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. In ITA No. 825/JP/2024

GREETING HANDS FOR ABANDONED RESCUES TRUST,AJMER vs. ITO WARD -2(1), AJMER

In the result, bunch of four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay of nine days in filing the Greeting Hands for Abandoned Rescues Trust vs. ITO appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. In ITA No. 825/JP/2024

GREETING HANDS FOR ABANDONED RESCUES TRUST ,AJMER vs. ITO WARD - 2(1), AJMER

In the result, bunch of four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

delay of nine days in filing the Greeting Hands for Abandoned Rescues Trust vs. ITO appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. In ITA No. 825/JP/2024

GREETING HANDS FOR ABANDONED RESCUES TRUST,AJMER vs. ITO WARD -2(1), AJMER

In the result, bunch of four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

delay of nine days in filing the Greeting Hands for Abandoned Rescues Trust vs. ITO appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. In ITA No. 825/JP/2024