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

sections 80C, 80CCF, 80D, 80DD and 80G to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-, 20,000, Rs 15,000/- Rs 1,00,000/- and Rs. 24,000/- respectively and further claiming loss under the head Income from House Property

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

property of assessee. This is incorrect as against the said show cause notice, reply was filed on 22.03.2024 (PB 107-114) along with the original constitution(PB 115-122). Further clause 26 of the amended constitution (PB 23) specifically provides that on dissolution the asset of the society would be merged with other society having same object and registered

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

property of assessee. This is incorrect as against the said show cause notice, reply was filed on 22.03.2024 (PB 107-114) along with the original constitution(PB 115-122). Further clause 26 of the amended constitution (PB 23) specifically provides that on dissolution the asset of the society would be merged with other society having same object and registered

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

The appeal of the appellant is partly allowed

sections 80C, 80CCF, 80D, 80DD and 80G to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-, 20,000, Rs 15,000/- Rs 1,00,000/- and Rs. 24,000/- respectively and further claiming loss under the head Income from House Property

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

The appeal of the appellant is partly allowed

sections 80C, 80CCF, 80D, 80DD and 80G to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-, 20,000, Rs 15,000/- Rs 1,00,000/- and Rs. 24,000/- respectively and further claiming loss under the head Income from House Property

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

houses in India for residential purposes and which is eligible for deduction under clause (viii) of sub-section (1) of section 36; (ixa) deposits with or investment in any bonds issued by a public company Mahima Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur vs. ACIT,(Exemption), Jaipur formed and registered in India with the main object of carrying on the business of providing long

ETERNAL FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

houses.” We further note that for the financial year 2015-16 the assessee has shown the receipt of donation of Rs. 20,000/- only and, therefore, at the time of registration there was no such activity of clinical trial carried out by the assessee. Thus it is clear that the registration was granted by considering the objects of the assessee

ETERNAL FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

houses.” We further note that for the financial year 2015-16 the assessee has shown the receipt of donation of Rs. 20,000/- only and, therefore, at the time of registration there was no such activity of clinical trial carried out by the assessee. Thus it is clear that the registration was granted by considering the objects of the assessee

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

section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. The assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 9,43,99,690/-. However, the AO has framed the assessment at the total income of Rs. 12,09,86,280/- by making the additions as under :- Return Income Rs. 9,43,99,690/- Add: Addition of Income from House property

CREDAI RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(5), JAIPUR

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

house property so it is not income falling under the head income from property as understood by A.O. The Ld. A.O. gave finding in assessment order “djnkrk AOP dh vksj ls izLrqr tokc esa x`g lEifr ls dksbZ vk; izkIr ugha gksuk n'kkZ;k x;k gS tcfd 26,,l ij miyC/k tkudkjh ds vk/kkj ij djnkrk

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

House, Gumanpura,\nKota.\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं. / PAN/GIR No.: AAATR8150J\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &\nShri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 23/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 20/11/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nThe present

CARELEAVERS INNER CIRCLE FORUM,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

80G cannot be granted without registration u/s 12AB • Application non maintainable taken benefit of section 11 or 12 3. Arguments heard. File perused. 4. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is a company incorporated on 25.11.2021 dedicated towards helping young adult who have grown up in orphanages or institutional care. It provides these individuals with crucial

ACIT(E), JAIPUR vs. COMPUCOM FOUNDATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

house property has to be allowed. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court again in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exm.) V/s Framjee Cawajee Institute (supra) has held that depreciation could not be denied simply because expenditure on acquisition of assets had already been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition of assets. We are thus

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