SRSL CHARITABLE TRUST ,UDAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalsrsl Charitable Trust, Vs. C.I.T.(E) Srsl House, Pulla Bhuwana Jaipur. Road, National Highway No. 8, Udaipur. Pan No. Aaats 3819 F Assessee By Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Revenue By Shri K.C. Badhok, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 01/02/2021 O R D E R Per: Bench This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(E), Jaipur Dated 02/01/2020 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted To The Assessee U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Incorrectly Holding That Activities Carried Out By The Assessee Are Not Genuinely Charitable & Also Not Carried Out In Accordance With The Objects Of The Trust. 1.1 The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Making Various Incorrect & Irrelevant Observations Particularly Holding That Rental Income Received From Letting Out The Properties Stated To Be Acquired For The Purpose Of Providing Educational Services To The Students Is An Activity Of Commercial In Nature Hit

b) The assessee is claiming to be engaged in carrying out educational activities which in fact is carried out by SRSL Educational Society. The trust deed of the assessee trust contains 17 objects which are charitable in nature and include the object of providing education. However, the assessee is not following any of its objects since the only activity which

SHRI SEWARAM CHARITABLE TRUST ,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD, EXEMPTION, UDAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

1)(b) as applicable for the relevant AY provides that where total income of the trust without giving effect to the provisions of section 11 & 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income tax in the previous year, it has to get its accounts audited before the specified date referred in section 44AB and to furnish

MADHAV UNIVERSITY,PINDWARA, SIROHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α No.789 &790/Jodh/2024 (Assessment Year:2024-25) Madhav University Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Exemption, Jaipur Pindwara, Madhav Hills, Nh 27, Vpo Bharja, Pindwara, Sirohi Rajasthan-307023 Pan: Aasam7855L Shri Amit Kothari Shri M.K. Jain, Cit(Dr.) Present For Assessee Present For Revenue Date Of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/08/2025 Order Per Bench: The Instant Appeals Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Jaipur (For Brevity, 'Ld.Cit(E)'] Order Passed Under Section 12Ab Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') & Order Passed Under Section 80G(5) Of The Act, Date Of Orders 30/09/2024. 2. Act Both The Appeals Related To Registration Under Section 12Ab& 80G Of The

12. 6. Section 13(3) Transactions at Arm's Length Payments to trustee (rent) were per lease agreement, at market rate, with TDS deducted, and later waived in favour of university. 7. Distancing from ED Proceedings 7.1. ED matters relate solely to sponsoring trust's and are not related to the appellant. Madhav University is operationally and legally distinct

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

B, section 80-IC. section 80- ID section 80JJAA, section 80LA, section 92E. [section 115JB or section 115VW] for to give a notice under Clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 11] of the Act, he shall furnish the same electronically.]" 5.3 On perusal of the provision of section 12A read with rule 12(2), it is clear that

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

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

1)(b) as these requirements are only directory in nature. We are of the view that the approach in the cases of the present type should be equitious, balancing and judicious. Technically, strictly and liberally speaking, the respondent might be justified in denying the exemption under section 12 of the Act 15 TRUST FOR REACHING by rejecting such condonation application

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

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

1)(b) as these requirements are only directory in nature. We are of the view that the approach in the cases of the present type should be equitious, balancing and judicious. Technically, strictly and liberally speaking, the respondent might be justified in denying the exemption under section 12 of the Act 15 TRUST FOR REACHING by rejecting such condonation application

SHREE VISHWAKARMA SUTRADHAR SAMPATI TRUST,BIKANER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, BIKANER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Hearing On The Case.

b) of the Act. The Assessing Officer further mentioned that the said trust is not registered under any Act or Law. He further stated that provision of section 11 & 12 shall not operate in accordance 6 Shree Vishwakarma Sutradhar Sampati Trust, Bikaner. with the provisions of section 13(8) of the Act and income tax shall be computed

SHRIYA DEVI MATA MANDIR PRAJAPAT SAMAJ SEVA SANSTHAN,RAJSAMAND vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Ble

trust and beneficiaries is society at large. Furthermore, it has been a settled law that section 13(1)(b) is relevant at the stage of assessment and not during registration process. However, whether the activities of the appellant society are charitable in nature and are in consonance to the objects of the Society needs to be examined at the stage

BHAMASHAH SUNDARLAL DAGA CHARITABLE TRUST,BIKANER vs. CIT - EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.278/Jodh/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga The Commissioner Of Charitable Trust, V Income Tax-Exemption, Bagree Mohallan, S Jaipur. Bikaner – 334001. Pan: Aaetb1013C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By Shri Suresh Ojha – Ar Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2023

1) shall be the following, namely :— (a) …….. (b) ………….. (c) ………………… (d)…………. (4) ………………………. (5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-section (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable purpose and if it fulfils the following conditions, namely :— (i) where the institution or fund

PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT,PALI vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

charitable institution from inception and, thus is entitled for getting its income computed by taking into consideration provisions of section 11(1) of the Act of 1961, even for the years prior to having certificate under Section 12A of the Act of 1961." From the above discussion, it is clear that the appellant trust is registered u/s 12A and eligible

ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), , JODHPUR vs. PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT, PALI

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

charitable institution from inception and, thus is entitled for getting its income computed by taking into consideration provisions of section 11(1) of the Act of 1961, even for the years prior to having certificate under Section 12A of the Act of 1961." From the above discussion, it is clear that the appellant trust is registered u/s 12A and eligible

MAHADEVIA CHARITABLE TRUST ,AHMEDABAD vs. PR. CIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Charitable Trust are not genuine and are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the assessee-trust. Therefore, the registration of the assessee-society u/s 12A is hereby cancelled by invoking section 12AA(3) with effect from 1.4.2009, i.e., financial year from which irregularities in the functioning of the assessee have come to notice. I am also

GLOBAL HEALTH RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE ,UDAIPUR vs. PR. CIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

charitable trust providing educational services. It runs a medical college under the name “M/s Pacific Institute of Medical Science” in Udaipur. The assessee was granted registration u/s 12A of the Act on 05.3.2001, subject to certain conditions. One of the conditions is that the assessee trust should adhere to the provisions of sec.13 of the Act. 4. The revenue carried

INDIRA EDUCATION INSTITUTE AND HEALTH SOCIETY,UDAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), UDAIPUR

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt thereof— (c) in the case of a trust for charitable or religious purposes or a charitable or religious institution, any income thereof— (i) if--------------, or (ii) if any part of such income or any property of the trust

INDIRA EDUCATION INSTITUTE AND HEALTH SOCIETY,UDAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), UDAIPUR

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt thereof— (c) in the case of a trust for charitable or religious purposes or a charitable or religious institution, any income thereof— (i) if--------------, or (ii) if any part of such income or any property of the trust

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

b) of the I.T. Act 1961. As such, cash deposited of Rs. 16,79,12,657/ -in bank accounts, earned interest income of Rs. 20,07,054/ - and purchase of immovable property to the tune of Rs. 17,76,51,821/ - has remained unexplained. In view of the above, it is clear that total amount

M/S. RAJASTHAN VIKAS SANSTHAN ,JODHPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S Rajasthan Vikas Sansthan, Vs. C.I.T.(E) Teesra Prahsar Bhawan, 1St A Jaipur. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur. Pan No. Aaatr 3975 P Assessee By Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Revenue By Shri K.C. Badhok, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 01/02/2021 O R D E R Per: Bench This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(E), Jaipur Dated 03/01/2020 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted To The Assessee U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Incorrectly Holding That Funds Of The Trust Has Been Diverted For Purchase Of Personal Property Of The Trustees & In Form Of Highly Unreasonable Security Deposits Given To The Trustees Without Charging Interest, Thereby Violating The Provisions Of Section 13(1)(C)(Ii) R.W.S. 13(2)(A) & 13(2)(G) 1.1 The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Not Considering The Decision Of Hon’Ble Itat In Assessee’S Own Case Whereby Vide Order Dated 16/12/2011 In Ita No. 11/Jodh/2011 It Was Held That It Case The Trust Fails To Comply With The Requirements As Mentioned In Section 11 & 13 Of The Act, Then Exemption Can Be Denied But Registration Cannot Be Cancelled.

b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under section 12A [as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently it is noticed that the activities of the trust or the institution are being carried out in a manner that the provisions of sections 11 and 12

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

ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR vs. M/S. PADMAVATI INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION & SCIENCE TRUST, , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 462/Jodh/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Circle- (Exemptions) Vs. M/S Padmavati Institute Jodhpur. For Medical Education & Science Trust, 38 Polo Ground, Udaipur. [Pan: Aabtp3103C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. Nos. 272 To 273/Jodh/2019 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2016-17 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Padmavati Institute For Udaipur. Medical Education & Science Trust, 101, Kothi Bagh, Bhatt Ji Ki Badi, Udaipur. [Pan: Aabtp3103C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amit Kothari, Ca Respondent By Sh. O.P. Meena, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2023 Order Per: Bench: A Batch Of Three Appeals Of The Revenue Were Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Udaipur,[In Brevity The ‘Cit (A)’]

b) The amount of Rs 7,43 95.029/-had been received from the Dr. Kirti Jain Family Foundation Inc..USA. The purpose of donation as approved under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA). was "Construction/running of hospital/dispensary/clinic" whereas the assessee had utilized the donation for repayment of loan. Vide letter dt. 20 09.2010, the donor trust had originally confirmed that