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 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

5. There has been a conflict of opinion between the various High Courts on the interpretation of section 80G(2)(a). In CIT v. Associated Cement Co. Ltd. [1968] 68

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

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

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

5 to 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

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

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

5%, thus violation of section 80G(5B).\n4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT (Exemption), the assessee preferred\nthe present appeals before us on the grounds mentioned hereinabove. All the\ngrounds raised by the assessee are inter-related and inter-connected and relates to\nchallenging the order of ld. CIT (Exemption) in denying registration under section

SHRI BHANWAR LAL KHICHI,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section (2) of section 288 and furnish along with the return of income for the relevant assessment year, the report of such audit in the prescribed form14 duly signed and verified by such accountant and setting forth such particulars as may be prescribed:] 15[Provided also that any amount of donation received by the fund or institution

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

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

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

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

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

80G(5) to the\nassessee-society. [Para 17]\n120-132\nBENEFITS TO TRUSTEES IS NOT GROUND FOR CANCELLATION\n13.\nTamil Nadu Cricket\nAssociation\nDIT(Exemptions)\n[2013]\ntaxmann.com\n(Madras)\nV.\n40\n250\nThus in contract to section 12AA(1)(b), where the grant of\nregistration requires satisfaction about the objects of the\ntrust as well as genuineness

SHRIADINATH JAIN SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN SAMITI ,ALWAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

17. As a result of the above discussion, we find merit in the contention of Ld

Bench: Learned Cit(E). Same Application Came To Be Rejected Vide Order Dated 24.12.2024. That Is How, The Applicant Samiti Is Before This Appellate Tribunal. 2. Arguments Heard. File Perused. 3. On 07.06.2024, Applicant Filed An Application Seeking Registration. Learned Cit(E) Rejected The Same On The Following Three Grounds:-

80G(5)(iii) of the Act, Learned CIT(E) could not reject the prayer for registration, when approval u/s 10 (23C)(vi) of the Act stood already granted to the applicant Samiti. 10. Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act provides that any income received by any university or other educational institution existing solely for education purpose

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

80G, exemption under s. 11 could not be denied to the assessee trust on the ground that the donations given by it were not utilized for the objects enumerated in the trust deed. 38. Further, on facts, it was submitted that Ld. Assessing Officer denied exemption under section 11 of the Act by alleging that the assessee society

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

Bench: Him.

68 of the Act — S.NO. Party Name Amount 1 Aventez Media Technology 40,00,000.00 2 Tarana Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. 10,00,000.00 3 Yamini Investments Company Ltd. 38,00,000.00 4 Premier Bars Pvt. Ltd. 1,25,00,000.00 5 Shreeji Developers 69,10,000.00 6 Ankur Taneja 41,80,000.00 7 Kanha Projects

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 and\nthe amount added to the total income of the assessee firm but, the AO\nfailed to do so.\n4.3 Ld. PCIT also noted that no invoices / purchase bills or other\nevidence

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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