ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

12A, read with sections 12AA and 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable\nor religious trust (Grant of registration) - Whether at stage of registration under section\n12A, only nature of activities of trust and its charitable purpose was to be looked into;\nregistration to assessee trust under said section could not be disallowed

SETH RB MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BANI PARK ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

12A of the Act is enclosed at page no. 83-86. The assessee claimed Rs. 43,272/- Amount accumulated or set apart / finally set apart for application to charitable or religious purposes to the extent it does not exceed 15 per cent. of income derived from property held in trust wholly or in part only for such purposes under section

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.

section 13 to disallow the expense of the income as the case maybe, if the same is not income in expense as per the approved bye-law but nonetheless cancellation of registration is uncalled for.” 8.3.4 In view of the above position, since the registration u/s 12A

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.

section 13 to disallow the expense of the income as the case maybe, if the same is not income in expense as per the approved bye-law but nonetheless cancellation of registration is uncalled for.” 8.3.4 In view of the above position, since the registration u/s 12A

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.

section 13 to disallow the expense of the income as the case maybe, if the same is not income in expense as per the approved bye-law but nonetheless cancellation of registration is uncalled for.” 8.3.4 In view of the above position, since the registration u/s 12A

M/S AVIS LIFE CARE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition in the Act, the action of the revenue in withdrawing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S J.M. ENVIRO STUDIES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition in the Act, the action of the revenue in withdrawing

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us.

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 9 ITA 1272/JP/2018_ Manoj Kr. Agarwal Vs DCIT 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition

DCIT, CIRCLE EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. STATE INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, JAIPR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

disallowed the deduction for the amount accumulated under provisions of section 11. 5.3.2 In this regard, as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, to claim exemptions u/s 11 and 12, conditions mentioned u/s 12A

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

section 12A(1)(b) states that: [(1)] The provisions of section 11 and section 12 shall not apply inrelation to the income of any trust or institution unless the followingconditions are fulfilled, namely:- (b)where the total income of the trust or institution as computedunder this Act without giving effect to [the provisions of section 11 andsection 12 exceeds

RAM NIWAS MODI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off\nthereby allowing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

disallowed to\ntheassessee out of his business expenditure. Now, the income of the assessee isnot\ncomputed as a business income. The Tribunal observed that the assessee was a\ncharitable institution and its income should be computed undersections 11, 12 and 13.\nClause (b) of section 40A(2) provides six categoriesof assessee, along with the list of\npersons who could

RAJASTHAN MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY,ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, CR BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

disallowed the claim 3 Rajasthan Medical Relief Society vs. ITO(E) under section 11 of the IT Act, 1961 in view of the provisions under section 12A

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

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SHEKSHANIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

disallowing deduction claimed under section 12A of the IT Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order the appellant has filed multiple

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

disallowed. Further, it is also pertinent to\nmention that the appellant will be eligible to claim the said deduction if it files a\nvalid return of income for the relevant year after getting the necessary approval\nfrom the competent authority under the provision of section 119(2) of the IT\nAct, 1961.\n6. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

disallowed. Further, it is also pertinent to\nmention that the appellant will be eligible to claim the said deduction if it files a\nvalid return of income for the relevant year after getting the necessary approval\nfrom the competent authority under the provision of section 119(2) of the IT Act,\n1961.\n6. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant

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)

Section 11(1)(a) since the assessee had not submitted a copy of registration u/s 12 A of the I.T. Act 1961. During appellate proceedings also, no evidence or registration copy has been submitted. Therefore, the order of the A.O. is upheld. In the result, the appeal is Dismissed. 11. Feeling dissatisfied with the order

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)

Section 11(1)(a) since the assessee had not submitted a copy of registration u/s 12 A of the I.T. Act 1961. During appellate proceedings also, no evidence or registration copy has been submitted. Therefore, the order of the A.O. is upheld. In the result, the appeal is Dismissed. 11. Feeling dissatisfied with the order