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)

disallowed the CSR expenditure as it is not allowable as per explanation 2 to sub section(1) of section 37 of the Income tax act,1961 But claimed deduction u/s 80 G of the Income tax act,1961 as it is allowable u/s 80G

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

disallowed the claim of the assessee by observing that since assessee has made donation under section 80G and, therefore, deduction under section 80G is allowable whereas the facts are otherwise. The assessee has not made any donation but has contributed to the trust for a specific purpose i.e. to incur the expenditure to get better milk from milk animal. Various

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

disallowed the claim of the assessee by observing that since assessee has made donation under section 80G and, therefore, deduction under section 80G is allowable whereas the facts are otherwise. The assessee has not made any donation but has contributed to the trust for a specific purpose i.e. to incur the expenditure to get better milk from milk animal. Various

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

80G in respect of donation of Rs 40072 disallowed by the Ld. A.O in assessment. 2.1 Apropos Ground No. 1 and 2 of the assessee, brief facts of the case are that the assessee in the status of AOP filed the return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 28-09-2012 declaring total income

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

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 80G(2)(a) even prior to its amendment. Therefore, the assessee's claim was rightly rejected" 6.6.3 Considering the facts of the case and respectfully following the judgement of Apex court(supra), I am inclined to agree with the assessing officer that appellant's claim of deduction of Rs. 1,27,67,676/- u/s 80G is not allowable. Thusdisallowance

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 80G(2)(a) even prior to its amendment. Therefore, the assessee's claim was rightly rejected" 6.6.3 Considering the facts of the case and respectfully following the judgement of Apex court(supra), I am inclined to agree with the assessing officer that appellant's claim of deduction of Rs. 1,27,67,676/- u/s 80G is not allowable. Thusdisallowance

NASH FASHIONS (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purposes

2. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 of assessee’s appeal effectively relates to disallowance of deduction claimed by the assessee U/s 80G of the Act amounting to Rs. 1,27,67,676/-. Briefly, the facts of the case are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that on perusal of details, it is noticed that

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

In the result, revenue’s ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

section 40A(2)(b) on account of excess salary payment; (iii) deleting addition of Rs. 1,03,00,000/- made by disallowing deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s 80G

SHIVA CORPORATION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DY. CIT, CC-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

section 2(14) are not outside the purview of the\ndefinition of the capital asset and thus the gain on the sale of the same is\nchargeable to tax.\nFROM DELT\n99 DT. 24-7-99\nER KUMAR\nVAN\nDECLA\nETTE\nADON NO\n1\nT. & C.\nSENIOR TOWN PLANNER\nPAN CHIULA\nCHIEP COORDINATOR PLANNER DIRECTOR T&C PLANNING\nNCRPANG-KULA

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

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

section 80G by the Finance Act, 1976.\nAfter the insertion of the aforesaid Explanation, there cannot be any doubt\nthat, for purposes of claiming deduction, only cash amounts which may have\nbeen donated would be taken into account. No doubt this provision is not\nretrospective in nature, none the less it indicates the legislative intent behind\nsection 80G(2

CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SHRI SATISH KUMAR AGARWAL, L/H SMT. SANTOSH AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

Disallowance u/s 80G as discussed in para Rs. 2,685/- no. 8 Add : Addition of unexplained Cash found Rs. 32,69,455/- during search as discussed in para no. 9. Add : Addition of on account of excess stock Rs. 2,32,09,339/- found as discussed in para no. 10. Assessed Total Income

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

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

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)

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), has been rejected. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant Trust is before this Appellate Tribunal by way of above-captioned two appeals.. 2. Arguments heard. File perused. 3. Present appeal has been preferred as prayer for registration of the applicant trust u/s 12AB of the Act has been

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)

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), has been rejected. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant Trust is before this Appellate Tribunal by way of above-captioned two appeals.. 2. Arguments heard. File perused. 3. Present appeal has been preferred as prayer for registration of the applicant trust u/s 12AB of the Act has been

M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

2 of part-V of lease\nagreement. Thus the cost of refilling of above ascertained liability and is\neligible for deduction because the assessee-company observes mercantile\nsystem of accounting.\"\n6. It has also been brought to our notice that even in the year 1993-94 though\nthe actual expenditure has been made, but that has been denied

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)

2) of the Act, amount of commission paid to a non resident outside India for the services rendered outside India will not fall in the category of income, and as such would not be chargeable to tax. So, the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on the commission. Consequently, provisions of section 40(a) (i) of the Act were