DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

charitable trust past 30 years THROUGH TRUSTEE, who substantially satisfies the condition for NIMITTABEN N BHATT availing such exemption, should not be denied the vs. COMMISSIONER OF same merely on the bar of limitation especially INCOME TAX when the legislature has conferred wide (EXEMPTIONS) (2021) discretionary powers to condone such delay on the 279 TAXMAN 229 :(2021) authorities concerned. Dushkal

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

charitable trust past 30 years THROUGH TRUSTEE, who substantially satisfies the condition for NIMITTABEN N BHATT availing such exemption, should not be denied the vs. COMMISSIONER OF same merely on the bar of limitation especially INCOME TAX when the legislature has conferred wide (EXEMPTIONS) (2021) discretionary powers to condone such delay on the 279 TAXMAN 229 :(2021) authorities concerned. Dushkal

UMED HOSPITAL MEDICARE RELIEF SOCIETY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CPC /ITO, EXEMPTION WARDM,, BANGALORE. JODHPUR

charitable trust. It is registered u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act while processing u/s 143(1) of the Act and the AO has not granted deduction u/s 11 of the Act for want of audit report in form 10B. The assessee filed its return of income belatedly on 29.03.2016, while processing the return of income

APNA GHAR ASHRAM,JODHPUR vs. DDIT, CPC / ITO, WARD (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE / JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust v. ITO(E) (2021) 278 Taxman 148 (Guj.). He also placed reliance on ITAT Pune's decision in Akshay Devendra Birari v. DCIT [ITA No. 782/PUN/2024] and the Jodhpur Bench’s ruling in Shiv Sai Sewa Samiti v. ITO, Ward-1, Jalore [ITA No. 137 & 138/Jodh/2023]. 4. Per contra, the Department relied upon the judgment of the Delhi

SUSHIL KUMAR MARLECHA,PALI vs. DEPUTY/ASSTT, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1,, GHAZIABAD / JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

section should be construed strictly and reasonably. The Bombay High Court in the case of Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (Bom) 393 : (1984) 150 ITR 460 (Bom), has also taken the same view. The Bombay High Court was dealing with a case where an application for renewal of registration was not signed by one of the partners

SUKHAD JEEVAN SANSTHAN,CHITTORGARH vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

119 of the Act, vide above, referred Circulars. As pe above referred CBDT Circular No.8/2022, the applicant/assessee, whose last date for filing Form No. 10AB for registration u/s 10 (23)(C)/12A/80G was falling on or before 29th September, 2022, was extended upto 30th September, 2022. Thereafter, there was no further extension for delay in filing Form No. 10AB

SMT. SARLA SINGHVI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

119(2)(b) passed by Ld. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur. 2. The ld. CIT (Appeals) has grossly erred on facts and in law while charging interest u/s 234A/B/C of Rs. 117392/-. 3. The appellant reserves rights to add/alter/amend/withdrawn any/all ground of the appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered under sec. 12AA