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)

80G(2)(a) (iiihl) on account of sum spent in pursuance of CSR under sub section 5 of Sec135 of the Companies act, 2013 has not been mentioned in Sec 80 G(2)(a)(iiia) of the act. 5. The Petitioner craves the right to add, alter or in any way amend the grounds of appeal on or before

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

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

disallowed.” 38. We now refer to the relevant findings of the CIT(A) which are under challenge before us: “I have gone through assessee’s submission and AO’s findings. The assessee had made payment of Rs. 9,80,51,000/- to Bansal Public In the my opinion, for the purposes of section 80G, what is required is to donate

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)

80G(4) says that:- ACIT vs. Nash Fashion (India) Ltd. (4) Where the aggregate of the sums referred to in sub-clauses (iv), (v), (vi), (via) and (vii) of clause (a) and in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) exceeds ten per cent of the gross total income (as reduced by any portion thereof on which income

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)

80G(4) says that:- ACIT vs. Nash Fashion (India) Ltd. (4) Where the aggregate of the sums referred to in sub-clauses (iv), (v), (vi), (via) and (vii) of clause (a) and in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) exceeds ten per cent of the gross total income (as reduced by any portion thereof on which income

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

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

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

5 to Section 80G of the\nIT Act.\n1.15\nIn regard to counter submissions made by the AO and filed before the\nhon'ble ITAT by the Additional CIT (Sr. DR), ITAT Jaipur and a copy there of\ngiven to the assessee inter-alia mentioning that the assessee failed to bring any\nevidence on record that the donation was made

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

vi) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, rejecting such\napplication,\nafter affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard;\nIn the matter, it is submitted that from the plain reading the Section 12AB of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, it is observed that Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is required to\nsatisfy himself with regard to 2 major aspects

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

vi) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, rejecting such\napplication,\nafter affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard;\nIn the matter, it is submitted that from the plain reading the Section 12AB of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, it is observed that Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is required to\nsatisfy himself with regard to 2 major aspects

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

vi) Further, the application of funds was not to be extent of 85% of receipts during the previous year. Thus, according to Section 13(1) nothing contained in sec. 11 or sec. 12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income and entire income of the trust is liable to pay income-tax as envisaged in the aforesaid

TIRUPATI COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

80G of the IT Act vide registration certificate dated 26/29.10.2010(PB18), thereafter approval under section 10 (23C) (vi) of the tax Act. 1961 vide notification No. 18/2010-11 endorsed vide letter no CCIT/ Addl. CIT (H.qrs)/JPR/10 (23C) (vi)/2010-11/3049 dated 23/25.11.2010 has also been granted to the assessee. The assessee society is filling its return of income regularly and assessment

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

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)

VI, ITA No.749/2014) which was to the effect that section 14A would not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. In other words, where there is no exempt income earned by an assessee in the previous year, no question of disallowance of expenditure incurred to earn exempt income would arise. 19. Herein

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

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

vi) of IT Act, 1961. 3. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal. 4. 5. Necessary cost to be awarded to the assessee. In ITA No. 790/JPR/2024, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1 The Ld. CIT (E) has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application filed

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

vi) of IT Act, 1961. 3. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal. 4. 5. Necessary cost to be awarded to the assessee. In ITA No. 790/JPR/2024, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1 The Ld. CIT (E) has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application filed

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

80G of the IT Act 1961 despite the fact that the said receipt of donation was declared by the trust as donation income and corresponding expenditure was claimed as application of income.” 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance

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

80G of the IT Act 1961 despite the fact that the said receipt of donation was declared by the trust as donation income and corresponding expenditure was claimed as application of income.” 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance

JAIPUR JEWELLERY SHOW,JAIPUR vs. ACIT-DCIT CIRCLE (EXEMP.), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

80G, had filed a return of income for the AY 2012-13 on 15/09/2021 3 JAIPUR JEWELLERY SHOW VS ACIT ,CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR admitting a taxable income of Rs.26,43,910/-. Though the Trust under the normal circumstances is eligible for exemption u/s.11, it had voluntarily opted to remain outside the scope of exemption, as it was found that proviso