DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GURU PRAGYA INFRA (P) LTD., JAIPUR

disallowed the claim of deduction for the reason that assessee has not fulfilled the following conditions prescribed u/s 80- IB(10):- (i) As per section 80-IB(10)(a), the project must be completed within five years from the end of the financial year in which it is approved by the Local Authority. The period of five years expired

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

10(23C(vi) has examined all these advances at page 36 to 42 held that there is no violations of the provisions of section 11(5) in giving such advance. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, I find that there is no violation of the provisions of section 11(5) of the I.T. Act and therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

10(23C(vi) has examined all these advances at page 36 to 42 held that there is no violations of the provisions of section 11(5) in giving such advance. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, I find that there is no violation of the provisions of section 11(5) of the I.T. Act and therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

10(23C(vi) has examined all these advances at page 36 to 42 held that there is no violations of the provisions of section 11(5) in giving such advance. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, I find that there is no violation of the provisions of section 11(5) of the I.T. Act and therefore

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

10\nor u/s 12AA can't be allowed to the appellant under the provision of IT Act, 1961. No\nsuch deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of it's income for\nsuch assessment year on or before the due date specified under section (1) of Section\n139. Hence, the appeal is hereby disallowed. Further

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

10\nor u/s 12AA can't be allowed to the appellant under the provision of IT Act, 1961. No\nsuch deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of it's income for\nsuch assessment year on or before the due date specified under section (1) of Section\n139. Hence, the appeal is hereby disallowed. Further

RAJASTHAN STATE TEXT BOOK BOARD,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

5. We have heard the rival submissions and considered them carefully. We have also perused the material on which our attention was drawn. After perusing the order of the CIT(A), we do not see any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has discussed all the facts of the case and also discussed the other

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

disallowed, contribution to Jaipur National University which has not been held to be application of income in view of violation of section 13(1)(c) and section 13(2)(a) of the Act, and addition to fixed Assets which have not been allowed as application of income. Taking into consideration all these issues in addition to systematic generation of surplus

SHARMA MODERN PUBLIC SCHOOL SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A)

section 10(23C)(iiiad), accordingly this disallowance of 10% is subject to out-come of the first issue set aside to the record of the AO. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 20/06/2019. ( jes'k lh- 'kekZ ) (fot; iky jkWo ½ (RAMESH C. SHARMA ) (VIJAY

SCHOLARS EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

5) in a prescribed mode and if not applied in\nfuture years, it hasto suffer tax. There is no concept of surplus fund with a charitable\nInstitution because charitable Institutionenjoys exemption on all those incomes which\nare applied for its objectives. Therefore, it is an incorrect standof the assessee.\nHowever, we find that a careful perusal of Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA vs. BHIM SINGH, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A) By The Assessee Which Were Allowed By The Ld. Cit (A) Are To Be Considered In This Appeal

disallowances made by the AO in the assessment framed under section 143(3) were deleted by the ld. CIT (A) as under :- 3 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 4 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 5 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 6 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. Thus it is clear that the ld. CIT (A) has followed the decision of this Tribunal in assessee

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

LATE SH. BHIM SEN BATRA L/H SH. HIMANSHU BATRA,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

DILIP SINGH YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

disallowance of exemption claimed under section 10(10AA) which was in excess Rs 300000.00. Same was replied by assessee in response column to notice as well as by e mail. The copy of said notice is enclosed as Page No’s 2-4 of paper book and the replies thereto are enclosed as page No’s 5

BHARTIYA SHIKSHA PRACHAR SAMITI TONK,TONK vs. CIRCLE(EXEMP.), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: Learned Cit(A), Feeling Dissatisfied With The Assessment Order Dated 06.12.2018. Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer. By Way Of Assessment Order, The Assessing Officer (Exemption Circle), Jaipur Computed The Total Income Of The Assessee As Under:- “7. Subject To Above, The Total Income In This Case Is Computed As Under:- Gross Receipts As Per Income & Expenditure A/C Rs. 8,20,85,351/- Less: Revenue Expenditure As Per Income & Expenditure Account Rs. 6,28,43,345/- Rs. 1,92,42,006/- Total Income Rs. 1,92,42,006/- Rs. 1,92,42,010/-“ Rounded Off

section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act and in disallowing exemption simply on the ground that the assessee was having no notification issued in its favour u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. 21. In view of the legal proposition discussed above, each educational institution was required to be considered separately for applying threshold limit of annual receipts