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

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

68,525/- on the basis of out of Rs. 10,000/- and held not justified, but again he also came on the estimation. Our submission is that out of the total payment of Rs. 1,11,25,500/- there are instances of 10 students (Rs. 10,000/-) on which there were no signatures. In such a situation even

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)

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-tax is not payable under any provision of this Act and by any amount in respect of which the assessee is entitled

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)

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-tax is not payable under any provision of this Act and by any amount in respect of which the assessee is entitled

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

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

68-71), in response to which the assessee filed a detailed\nrepliesdt. 21.03.2022& 10.06.2024 (PB 72-74& 79-82 respectively).Unfortunately, however, the\nCIT(E) without consider the same, again rejected the application for registration u/s 12AAvide\nimpugned order on dt. 27.06.2024, on various new grounds (which were not raised during the 1st\nround) i.e (a) Non-genuineness of activities

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

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

68 ITR 478(Bombay) and CIT Vs. Benglore Woolen\nCotton & Silk Mills, 91 ITR 166(Mysore), held that the transaction in substance\nis a money transaction and the donation is virtually a donation of sum of money\nand assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.80G of the I.T. Act. As mentioned\nabove appeal by the department against the ITAT order

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

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

68-71), in response to which the assessee filed a detailed repliesdt. 21.03.2022& 10.06.2024 (PB 72-74& 79-82 respectively).Unfortunately, however, the CIT(E) without consider the same, again rejected the application for registration u/s 12AAvide impugned order on dt. 27.06.2024, on various new grounds (which were not raised during the 1st round) i.e (a) Non-genuineness of activities

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

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

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

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

5. As noticed above, one of the grounds for rejecting the application u/s 12AB of the Act is that there were discrepancies in the Article of Association. In this regard, the observations made by Ld. CIT(E) need to be reproduced for ready reference. Said observations read as under:- “03. Discrepancies in Article of Association 3.1. On perusal

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

Bench: Him.

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

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

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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 :

5. The assessee hereby craves the leave to add, delete, amend or abandon any grounds of this appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the case.” 1.1 The assessee in ITA No.810/JPR/2023 has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(Exemption) has grossly erred

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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 :

5. The assessee hereby craves the leave to add, delete, amend or abandon any grounds of this appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the case.” 1.1 The assessee in ITA No.810/JPR/2023 has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(Exemption) has grossly erred

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

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

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

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

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

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