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

section 2(15) has to be given a restricted meaning and would only 14 ITA 58/Jodh/2020 SRSL Charitable Trust Vs CIT(E) mean

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

Charitable Trust [A] 11.3 Therefore, in these facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the Assessee Trust had applied for registration within the time allowed under the Act. Hence, the application of the assessee is valid and maintainable. 12. Even otherwise, the Provisional Approval is uptoA.Y.2025-26, and it can be cancelled by the ld.CIT(E) only

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

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

section 11 of IT Act. 11 Social Security Scheme Of An assessee, which is a public charitable trust for Gicea Vs. Commissioner Of past 30 years which substantially satisfies the Income Tax (Exemptions) conditions for availing such exemption, should not (2022) 112 TLC 383 be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation (Hon’ble Gujarat High especially when

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

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

section 11 of IT Act. 11 Social Security Scheme Of An assessee, which is a public charitable trust for Gicea Vs. Commissioner Of past 30 years which substantially satisfies the Income Tax (Exemptions) conditions for availing such exemption, should not (2022) 112 TLC 383 be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation (Hon’ble Gujarat High especially when

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

ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR vs. M/S. VIDYA BHAWAN SOCIETY, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradacit, Vs M/S. Vidya Bhawan Circle (Exemption), Society, Mohan Singh, Jodhpur Mehta Marg, Fatehpur, Udaipur (Raj.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/03/2023 Date Of 24/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M.: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Udaipur Dated 27.06.2019. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Charitable or religious trust - Denial of exemption (Sub-section (1)(d)) - Assessee-trust was running a hospital cum research institute - It filed return declaring nil income = In course of assessment, Assessing Officer found that assessee had received gift of shares of company 'T' which were subsequently written off - Assessing Officer took a view that assessee was under an obligation

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.

section 12AA(4) more particularly when subsequently the entire amount lying in the imprest of Sh. Manish Vyas has been returned back by him by 14.08.2018. 13. The next grievance of Ld. CIT(E) relates to amount of Rs.9 lacs paid to RVS Company. In this regard we observed that RVS Company, i.e. Rajasthan Vikas 14 ITA 44/Jodh/2020 M/s Rajasthan

JYOTI MALIWAL,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

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

charitable Trust who is having tax exemption u/s 10(20) of the Act. For reference, an extract from the section 1941A is reproduced hereunder:- "Payment on transfer of certain immovable property other than agricultural land22a 194-IA. (1) Any person, being a transferee, responsible for paying (other than the person referred to in section 194LA) to a resident transferor

KIRAN JAIN,BHILWARA vs. ITO, WARD-1, TDS,, BHILWARA

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

charitable Trust who is having tax exemption u/s 10(20) of the Act. For reference, an extract from the section 1941A is reproduced hereunder:- "Payment on transfer of certain immovable property other than agricultural land22a 194-IA. (1) Any person, being a transferee, responsible for paying (other than the person referred to in section 194LA) to a resident transferor

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

14 days. The assessee has filed a petition requesting the bench to condone the delay. It was explained that there was delay in getting legal advice and accordingly, it is prayed that the delay may be condoned. We have heard the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the submissions made by the assessee, we are of the view

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

charitable if an institution is engaged in “trade, commerce or business” or provides any service relating to “trade, commerce or business” for which cess, fee or other consideration is received. In the case in hand, the AO despite 44 | P a g e having recorded that though the assessee trust’s activity fall under the ambit of “general public utility

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)’]

trust as per the stated main object. Expenses were incurred for charitable activities. The delay in project was due to stuck up of construction as per order of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. In our considered view, there is no violation of section 11(1)(d) r.w.s. 11(1). We find that there is no valid reason to interfere

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR vs. 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)’]

trust as per the stated main object. Expenses were incurred for charitable activities. The delay in project was due to stuck up of construction as per order of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. In our considered view, there is no violation of section 11(1)(d) r.w.s. 11(1). We find that there is no valid reason to interfere

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR vs. 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)’]

trust as per the stated main object. Expenses were incurred for charitable activities. The delay in project was due to stuck up of construction as per order of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. In our considered view, there is no violation of section 11(1)(d) r.w.s. 11(1). We find that there is no valid reason to interfere

CLG UNIVERSAL FOUNDATION,JODHPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, ITAs 192 & 280/Jodh/2024 are allowed and ITA

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

charitable institution • Bogus salary expenses of Rs. 10,83,000/- & Rs. 14,54,900/- shown for F.Y. 2021-22 & 2022-23 for meagre activities that too proved non genuine. • No bills/vouchers were produced to justify any expense debited in books, thus the same are also non genuine. • Directors could not give any justification for what work remuneration

CLG UNIVERSAL FOUNDATION ,JODHPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION),, JAIPUR

In the result, ITAs 192 & 280/Jodh/2024 are allowed and ITA

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

charitable institution • Bogus salary expenses of Rs. 10,83,000/- & Rs. 14,54,900/- shown for F.Y. 2021-22 & 2022-23 for meagre activities that too proved non genuine. • No bills/vouchers were produced to justify any expense debited in books, thus the same are also non genuine. • Directors could not give any justification for what work remuneration

CLG UNIVERSAL FOUNDATION,JODHPUR vs. CIT ( EXEMPTION),, JAIPUR

In the result, ITAs 192 & 280/Jodh/2024 are allowed and ITA

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

charitable institution • Bogus salary expenses of Rs. 10,83,000/- & Rs. 14,54,900/- shown for F.Y. 2021-22 & 2022-23 for meagre activities that too proved non genuine. • No bills/vouchers were produced to justify any expense debited in books, thus the same are also non genuine. • Directors could not give any justification for what work remuneration

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 purpose" is defined in Section 2(15) of the IT Act, 1961. It is of inclusive nature as revealed in the language. Earlier the words "the advancement of any other object of general public utility" in this definition were succeeded by the words "not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit". These words were omitted

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