INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN CRICEKT ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

section 11 and 12 of the Act. We deem it appropriate to reproduce the said findings in verbatim as under: “4. We have considered, the rival contentions, perused the material available records. The only issue to be examined under the facts of the present case is whether the Assessing Officer was justified in declining the claim of the deduction

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

section 11 and 12 of the Act. We deem it appropriate to reproduce the said findings in verbatim as under: “4. We have considered, the rival contentions, perused the material available records. The only issue to be examined under the facts of the present case is whether the Assessing Officer was justified in declining the claim of the deduction

SHRI GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Although The Second Round Of Assessment Was Completed At The Directions Of Hon’Ble Itat.

12,25,525/- arbitrarily without any cogent reason. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 8,78,500/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without any cogent reason and hence needs to deleted. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JAIPUR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue are disposed off with above directions

12. The aforesaid decision has since been followed by the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for AY 2014-15. Following the Coordinate Bench decision in assessee’s own case for earlier years and considering the principle of consistency, we see no reason to deviate from the earlier decision and accordingly, for the purposes of section 80P(2

M/S. JAIPUR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue are disposed off with above directions

12. The aforesaid decision has since been followed by the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for AY 2014-15. Following the Coordinate Bench decision in assessee’s own case for earlier years and considering the principle of consistency, we see no reason to deviate from the earlier decision and accordingly, for the purposes of section 80P(2

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN EMPLOYEES CREDIT & THIRFT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the results appeal of the assessee in ITA No

2)(a) (i) to(vii) of the ITA is covered\nthe whole of the amount of profits and gains of business attributable to any one\nor more of such activities.\"\nThe Apex court in the case of Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT\n[1978] 113 ITR 84 defined the meaning of the word of “attributable to”\nThe

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

12 of its order which read as under: “8. We have heard counsel for the parties. 9. In our considered opinion, the contention which has been raised pursuant to the observations and amendment which is made under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act and proviso which is impressed by the counsel for the department and Section 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

12 of its order which read as under: “8. We have heard counsel for the parties. 9. In our considered opinion, the contention which has been raised pursuant to the observations and amendment which is made under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act and proviso which is impressed by the counsel for the department and Section 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

12 of its order which read as under: “8. We have heard counsel for the parties. 9. In our considered opinion, the contention which has been raised pursuant to the observations and amendment which is made under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act and proviso which is impressed by the counsel for the department and Section 2

RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

section 50C ignoring the fact that transfer was made vide sale agreement on dated 22.01.2006. 12. On the facts & circumstances of the case and law also ld. Ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in modifying the assessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act to the order passed u/s 147/144 of the Act without giving any opportunity for same

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing.”

12 and 2012-13 in which similar issues were decided by Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur. The same issues are also pertaining to this year i.e. 2016-17 wherein Assessing Officer made disallowance under section 36(1)(vii)(a)(c) of Rs. 34,62,000/- on account of bad debts written off and applied provision of section 115JB

THE JEWELLERS ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

12 of the 11 Act, 1961 as its income allegedly constitute commercial activity and therefore 2 ITA 197/JP/2022 THE JEWELLERS ASSOCIATION VS ACIT, CIRCLE-1 JAIPUR provisions of first proviso to clause (15) of Sec 2 r.w.s. 13 (8) becomes applicable to it. 2. That without prejudice to the ground No. (1) above on the case

THE AJMER COOPERATIVE THRIFT AND SAVING SOCIETY LIMITED AJMER,AJMER vs. CIT(A), NFAC, AJMER

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

disallowed the deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) whereas on the contrary the assessee claimed that the business of the appellant society is to provide credit facility to its members and accepts the deposits from its members only to develop the habits of saving amongst themselves. The ld. A/R of the assessee has also argued that the surplus

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

disallowing the rae of profit declared by\nthe assessee. In view of the above discussion, it is held that the AO was justified in\nmaking addition u/s 2(22)(e) even when addition was already made in the original\nassessment proceedings on account of less profit rate declared by the assessee.\n4.7.5 The copy of reasons of reopening were provided

SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,KOTA vs. ITO, KOTA

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

disallowance and subsequent addition made u/s 56 accordingly. In the result, this ground of assessee’s appeal is allowed.” 6.1 As regards the claim u/s 80P(2)(d), we find that the only condition for availing the deduction under this provision is any income by way of interest or dividend derived by the Cooperative society from its investment with

SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

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

disallowance and subsequent addition made u/s 56 accordingly. In the result, this ground of assessee’s appeal is allowed.” 6.1 As regards the claim u/s 80P(2)(d), we find that the only condition for availing the deduction under this provision is any income by way of interest or dividend derived by the Cooperative society from its investment with

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Assessing Officer have erred in holding that first & second proviso to section 2(15) of the Act, 1961 is applicable in the assessee's case. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

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

12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Assessing Officer have erred in holding that first & second proviso to section 2(15) of the Act, 1961 is applicable in the assessee's case. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case