BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

42 results for “section 68”+ Section 80Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai164Delhi146Bangalore57Kolkata48Ahmedabad46Jaipur42Pune37Chennai36Lucknow22Hyderabad19Chandigarh16Indore11Rajkot8Cuttack6Panaji3Surat3Amritsar3Patna2Visakhapatnam1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1Nagpur1Raipur1Ranchi1SC1Telangana1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 12A69Section 80G54Section 271B24Section 271(1)(c)21Section 1019Addition to Income19Penalty17Section 14815Section 1115Exemption

MANDIR SHREE BHAIRAV JI TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

ITA 427/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Nov 2023

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vikash Rajvanshi (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

68). “ Moreover, the assessee-trust has carried on other charitable activities in the nature of relief of poor. The Vedic Scholars were identified and felicitated irrespective of their caste, creed or religion and the assessee is allowed registration under section 12A of the Act as charitable trust. Consequently, the approval under section 80G

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

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

15
Deduction15
Section 143(3)14

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

ITA 89/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT a
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

Section 80G do not mandate that the payment should be made directly to the donee.The factual position as given above is that the assessee had made the payments by cheques to the suppliers of equipments on behalf of donee which tantamount to donation made as a sum of money. That the AO should have seen the substance

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

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

ITA 159/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT a
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

Section 80G do not mandate that the payment should be made directly to the donee.The factual position as given above is that the assessee had made the payments by cheques to the suppliers of equipments on behalf of donee which tantamount to donation made as a sum of money. That the AO should have seen the substance

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

In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 346/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri M. L. Borad (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 263Section 40Section 80G

section 80G is not available. However, in this decision, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court after referring to the decision of Bombay High Court in case CIT Vs. Associated Cement Co. Ltd. 68

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

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

ITA 698/JPR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2017AY 2010-11
Section 40A(2)(b)

68,825/- made by AO on account of refund of caution money. (ii) deleting the addition of Rs. 19,65,348/- made by the AO on account of depreciation on PLD unit building on the basis of additional evidence admitted in violation of Rule 46A. (iii) deleting the addition of Rs. 5,52,000/- out of total addition

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

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

ITA 160/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh Addl. CIT
Section 40Section 80G

Section 80G do not mandate that the payment should be made directly to the\ndonee.The factual position as given above is that the assessee had made the\npayments by cheques to the suppliers of equipments on behalf of donee which\ntantamount to donation made as a sum of money. That the AO should have seen\nthe substance

SHRI MERH KSHTRIYA SABHA,AJMER vs. CIT(APPEALS), DELHI

ITA 632/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 11(1)Section 115BSection 12ASection 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80G

68 of the IT act and hence the facts of the appellant are different, In\nfact, relied upon the decision supports the stand of the Assessing Officer that\nin absence of identity details of donor's, section 115BBC and section 2(24)(iia)\nof the Act are squarely applicable. Also Section 115BBC clearly states that the\namount

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

ITA 1352/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

section 142(1) of the Act dated 13.02.2021 was asked to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of loan transactions. The assessee submitted details and on perusal of the same ld. AO noticed that it has failed to justify the unsecured loan from the following parties. (i) Aventez Media Technology- The assessee has received loan

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1015/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, for the sake\nof convenience, we dispose off all the grounds through a consolidated order.\n5. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee reiterated the arguments as were raised\nby him before the ld. CIT (Exemption) and also relied on the written submission\nsubmitted before us which are reproduced

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

ITA 484/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19
For Respondent: \nSh. S. L. Poddar, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 263

68 of the Act, but the AO failed to consider / apply his\nmind on this issue.\n4.2 Ld. PCIT further noted that the assessee firm had claimed deduction\nof Rs.23,876/-, under section 80G

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

ITA 1021/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, we dispose off all the grounds through a consolidated order. 5. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee reiterated the arguments as were raised by him before the ld. CIT (Exemption) and also relied on the written submission submitted before us which are reproduced

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

ITA 643/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jun 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varindra Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 115BSection 145(2)Section 14ASection 24

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

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

ITA 903/JPR/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Feb 2025AY 2024-2025

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

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Sancheti, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 8Section 80G

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

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

ITA 547/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 133(6) of the Act to make\ninquiries about claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, the original\nreturn, which was invalid, would have attained finality and after lapse of\nmaximum time limit to initiate any action under the Income Tax Act, 1961, no\naction could have been taken leaving the Department at total loss

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

ITA 546/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 133(6) of the Act to make\ninquiries about claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, the original\nreturn, which was invalid, would have attained finality and after lapse of\nmaximum time limit to initiate any action under the Income Tax Act, 1961, no\naction could have been taken leaving the Department at total loss

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

ITA 543/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80C

section 133(6) of the Act to make\ninquiries about claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, the original\nreturn, which was invalid, would have attained finality and after lapse of\nmaximum time limit to initiate any action under the Income Tax Act, 1961, no\naction could have been taken leaving the Department at total loss

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

ITA 544/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 133(6) of the Act to make\ninquiries about claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, the original\nreturn, which was invalid, would have attained finality and after lapse of\nmaximum time limit to initiate any action under the Income Tax Act, 1961, no\naction could have been taken leaving the Department at total loss

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

ITA 545/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 133(6) of the Act to make\ninquiries about claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, the original\nreturn, which was invalid, would have attained finality and after lapse of\nmaximum time limit to initiate any action under the Income Tax Act, 1961, no\naction could have been taken leaving the Department at total loss

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

Appeal is partly allowed; while

ITA 170/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 195(1)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A

68,120.00 4. Reinhard Bosse UND Geschaftskunden Ag, Bahnhofstrabe 17, 49525 Lengerich, Germany 7, 10,060.00 5. Shamlan Naseer Ali Doha, Qatar, YEMEN 1, 76,698.00 Total: 38, 92,787.00 The AO has disallowed the said amount U/s. 40(a) (i) on the ground that the assessee has not deducted the tax at source as required

AAGAZ SAMAJIK VIKAS SANSTHA ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 810/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Aug 2024

Bench: Dr.S.Seethalakshmi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.809 & 810/Jpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : - Aagaz Samajik Vikas The Commissioner Of Sanstha, V Income Tax, 45A/69, Near Office Lane, S Exemption, Jaipur. Behind Rainbow Jewellers, Jagdish Colony, Ramgarh Mode, Jaipur – 302002. Pan: Aaeaa5124E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ajey Malik – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Jaipur Both Dated 25.02.2023. The Assessee In Ita No.809/Jpr/2023 Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal :

Section 12ASection 80G

80G without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is thus hereby prayed for quashing the said rejection order so made as it was against the principles of natural justice. Aagaz Samajik Vikas Sanstha [A] 3. The assessee hereby craves the leave to add, delete, amend or abandon any grounds of this appeal at the time