GANGAUR EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and order of Ld

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 80G, since the expenditure was disallowed under a particular section could not have been allowed under another section. Further

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

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

section (1). 5. After considering of facts, the AO has made 1,27,67,676/- by disallowing deduction u/s 80G

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. NASH FASHION(INDIA) LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

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

section (1). 5. After considering of facts, the AO has made 1,27,67,676/- by disallowing deduction u/s 80G

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

section (1).\n5. After considering of facts, the AO has made 1,27,67,676/- by disallowing\ndeduction u/s 80G

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

disallowed only on basis that\nagreement entered into by assessee with its sister concern benefited said concern in\nviolation of section 13(1) - Held, yes [Para 28] [In favour of assessee]\nThe above order was challenged by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax before the\nHon'ble High Court of Bombay [2019] 104 taxmann.com 167 (Bombay) where the\nhon'ble court

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

disallowed only on basis that\nagreement entered into by assessee with its sister concern benefited said concern in\nviolation of section 13(1) - Held, yes [Para 28] [In favour of assessee]\nThe above order was challenged by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax before the\nHon'ble High Court of Bombay [2019] 104 taxmann.com 167 (Bombay) where the\nhon'ble court

SHRI BABA BALAKNATH SEVA SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION , JAIPUR

Appeals are disposed of

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 12 AA of the Act having also been disallowed, the appellant opted to proceed with this appeal. 16. As noticed above, vide separate order of even date in ITA No. 552/JPR/2024 filed by the applicant trust has been disposed off, thereby setting aside the order dated 29.03.2024 passed by Learned CIT(E) vide which prayer for registration

SHRI BABA BALAKNATH SEVA SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Appeals are disposed of

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 12 AA of the Act having also been disallowed, the appellant opted to proceed with this appeal. 16. As noticed above, vide separate order of even date in ITA No. 552/JPR/2024 filed by the applicant trust has been disposed off, thereby setting aside the order dated 29.03.2024 passed by Learned CIT(E) vide which prayer for registration

VIDHYA ADITI FOUNDATION,VIJAY PATH vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

10. As a result, this appeal ITA No

Bench: Learned Cit(E), Seeking Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). Said Application Has Been Dismissed By Learned Cit(E) Vide Order Dated 17.02.2024, While Rejecting Registration On The Following Three Grounds:-  Incomplete Form 10Ab Having Been Submitted.  Registration Under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 Not Proved.  Genuineness Of Activities Of Trust Not Established.

Section 80G of the Act has been disallowed. The ground for rejection of application, as per impugned order, is that

INDIA COMMERCIAL SERVICES ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

section 80G, but no supporting document/evidence to\nverify said claim was submitted during assessment proceedings, and\nobserved that deduction of Rs. 23,876/- should have been disallowed

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

80G(5)(i)(b), reproduced\nhere under:\n“(B) The compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in\nforce by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its\nobjects;\"\nSimilar requirement appears under section 12AB(1)(b)(i)(B) also.\nThus, a bare reading of the provision make it obligatory

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

80G (5) of IT Act, 1961. 3 The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal. 4. Necessary cost to be awarded to the assessee. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed an online application in Form No. 10AB dated: 27.09.2023 seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act in continuation

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

80G (5) of IT Act, 1961. 3 The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal. 4. Necessary cost to be awarded to the assessee. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed an online application in Form No. 10AB dated: 27.09.2023 seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act in continuation

DEREWALA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6, JAIPUR

Appeal is partly allowed; while

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

80G of the Act. 24. As regards section 37(1) of the Act, onus to prove that said expenses were incurred exclusively for the purposes of business, and that same were not of the form of personal expenses or capital expenses, was on the assessee. Since the assessee did not produce any material in this regard before the authorities below

RUDRAKSH PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

disallowed exemption claimed by assessee u/s. 11-CIT(A)allowed claim of assessee-Held, in assessee's own case for AY 2007-08, in ITA No.5760/Mum/2010, it was held that merely because courses were not approved by DG Shipping, could not be ground for denial of exemption u/s. 11 as long as Trust was imparting education as per its objects

AGRASEN MEDICAL RELIEF & RESEARCH SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. ITO(E), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1026/JPR/2025 निर्धरणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2016-17 Agrasen Medical Relief & Research Society Central Spine, Sector -7, Vidhyadhr Nagar Jaipur - 302 039 (Raj) बनाम Vs. अपीलार्थी / Appellant स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAATA 7540F The ITO (E) Ward - 1 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby :Shri P.C.Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudh

80G. It may also be noted that the AO in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dt. 10.2.2014 for AY 2011-12 has accepted that assessee is registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The assessee has subsequently been granted fresh registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act, the precondition of which is that the trust or institution

AGRASEN MEDICAL RELIEF & RESEARCH SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. ITO(E), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 80G. It may also be noted that the AO in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dt. 10.2.2014 for AY 2011-12 (PB 44-45) has accepted that assessee is registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The assessee has subsequently been granted fresh registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act, the precondition of which is that

AJOY SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case