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

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

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 approval u/s 80G was not extended till 30.09.2023. Therefore, on harmonious interpretation of both

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

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

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 approval u/s 80G was not extended till 30.09.2023. Therefore, on harmonious interpretation of both

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

delay in filing the cross objection and the same is hereby condoned and the cross objection so filed by the assessee trust is admitted for adjudication. 6. In this regard, the ld. AR submitted that the provisions of section 147, being prejudicial to the interest of the assessee, are safeguarded by certain preconditions. In the present case

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing.”

condone the aforesaid delay. The appeal is, thus, taken up for disposal on merits. 4.3 It is observed that while processing the return of income, the AO has levied minimum alternate tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act amounting to Rs.2,47,61,511/- Aggrieved by this order, the appellant has preferred this appeal. The appellant has contended that

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

SAIDATTAVIKAS SAIDHAM CHARITABLE TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 368 & 369/JPR/2025 u/s 12AB and 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2024-25 Saidatta Vikas Saidham Charitable Trust Khata No. 283 New, 283 Old, 283 Khasra No.2279 & 2280, Pushkar, Ajmer 305 001 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABGTS 4072 D अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : None राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of H

12(1)(ac) (vi) as the objectives of the trust are for betterment of each and every creature irrespective of caste, creed, etc. 8) The honourable Commissioner Exemption has wrongly cancelled the provisional registration, without considering the fact that the assessee has already submitted all the requisite details as and when required by the honourable Commissioner, Exemption, but the Commissioner

SAIDATTAVIKAS SAIDHAM CHARITABLE TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 368 & 369/JPR/2025 u/s 12AB and 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2024-25 Saidatta Vikas Saidham Charitable Trust बनाम | The CIT-Exemption, Khata No. 283 New, 283 Old, 283 Khasra Vs. Jaipur. No.2279 & 2280, Pushkar, Ajmer 305 001 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABGTS 4072 D अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : None प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent राजस्व की ओरसे /

12(1)(ac) (vi) as the objectives of the trust are for betterment of each and every creature irrespective of caste, creed, etc. 8) The honourable Commissioner Exemption has wrongly cancelled the provisional registration, without considering the fact that the assessee has already submitted all the requisite details as and when required by the honourable Commissioner, Exemption, but the Commissioner

RANIWALA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6,JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

delay in verification of Form No. 10DA, which is otherwise uploaded well in time can be made basis for disallowance, on procedural ground, or not. It is observed that the Ld. Addl./JCIT (A) - 6, Mumbairelied upon the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of [2022] 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC)Principal Commissioner of Income-taxvs.Wipro

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)

ac)(iii) vide order dt. 29.06.2023 (PB 1-4) but refused the registration u/s 80G(5) by giving the following reasons:- 6 Go Gram Eco Foundation vs. CIT(E) (i) The application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section 80G(5) is required to be filed at least 6 months prior to the expiry

SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER TERAPANTHI VIDYALAYA COMMITTEE,STATION ROAD, PURANI SADAK vs. CIT EXEMPTION, CIT EXEMPTION JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Jain Shwetamber Terapanthi Vidyalaya Committee, Station Road Churu, Rajasthan - 331001 Pan No.:Aaots0584M ...... Appellant Vs. Cit Exemption, Jaipur, Kailash Height, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur ...... Respondent

12 or clause (23AA) or clause (23C) of section 10 : Provided that where an institution or fund derives any income, being profits and gains of business, the condition that such income would not be liable to inclusion in its total income under the provisions of section 11 shall not apply in relation to such income, if— (a) the institution

SHRI PARNAMI PANCHAYAT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

ac) of sub-section (1), from the first of the assessment year for which it was provisionally registered: Provided further that where registration has been granted to the trust or institution under section 12AA or section 12AB], then, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in respect of any income derived from property held under trust

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 249(3) is discretionary in nature and the assessee cannot seek condonation of delay under this provision as a matter of right, but has to satisfy the Commissioner (Appeals) by explaining the sufficient cause for the delay. 4. Just because there is merit in the appeal filed by the assessee, any amount of delay, however, negligently caused, cannot

D. S. FOUNDATION,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

12(1)(ac)(vi) as the objectives of the trust are social welfare, helping needy, general public utility etc. 9.No opportunity of being heard was granted to the assessee before cancellation of provisional registration, this is beyond the principle of natural justice. 10.The cancellation of provisional registration is not just and fair as there was not any single opportunity

D. S. FOUNDATION,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM, आयकरअपील सं. / ITA Nos.588 & 589/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear :2024-25 | D.S. Foundation | बनाम | CIT Exemption | |------------------------------------|------|---------------| | Office No. 20 Shrinath Mall, | Vs. | Jaipur | | Near Bajrang Garh Krishna Ganj, | | | | Ajmer | | | | स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETD 3273 C | | | | अपीलार्थी / Appellant | | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent | निधर्धारित

12(1)(ac)(vi) as the objectives of the trust are social welfare, helping needy, general public utility etc. 9.No opportunity of being heard was granted to the assessee before cancellation of provisional registration, this is beyond the principle of natural justice. 10.The cancellation of provisional registration is not just and fair as there was not any single opportunity

UMMAT HUMAN HELP SANSTHA AJMER,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust applied in Form No. 10AB of the Act vide dated: 27.09.2023. After considering the replies of the assessee in response to the notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur, application of the assessee was dismissed

UMMAT HUMAN HELP SANSTHA AJMER,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust applied in Form No. 10AB of the Act vide dated: 27.09.2023. After considering the replies of the assessee in response to the notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur, application of the assessee was dismissed

UMMAT HUMAN HELP SANSTHA AJMER,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust applied in Form No. 10AB of the Act vide dated: 27.09.2023. After considering the replies of the assessee in response to the notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur, application of the assessee was dismissed

UMMAT HUMAN HELP SANSTHA AJMER,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust applied in Form No. 10AB of the Act vide dated: 27.09.2023. After considering the replies of the assessee in response to the notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur, application of the assessee was dismissed

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in granting approval for earlier years. This decision is on section 10(23C)(vi) and thus not applicable. Even the principal laid down in this decision and the High Court decision referred therein is that even if application is filed late, the approval should be granted from the AY relevant to the PY in which the application