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, it requires for the business income of a trust or institution to be exempt is that the business should be incidental to the attainment of objectives of the trust or institution. The income from the business which is utilized by the trust or institution for the purposes of achieving the objectives of the trust or the institution is, surely

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust Total Receipt Rs.2,87,19,463/- Rs.2,029/- Rs.2,87,21,492/- Revenue Rs.2,62,66,818/- Rs.33,61,824/- Rs.2,96,28,642/- Expenditure (including depreciation) Surplus Rs.24,52,645/- Rs.(33,59,795/-) Rs.(9,07,150)/- From the above it can be noted that if the income of assessee is to be computed without allowing

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.

28 /03/2025 ORDER PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT (A)-4, Bangaluru dated 16.03.2024 passed under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1. That order passed by the CIT (Appeal

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

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

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

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

section 10(20) Explanation clause (iii). The High Court has not adverted to the relevant facts and circumstances and without considering the relevant aspects has arrived at erroneous conclusions. Judgments of the High Court are unsustainable. In view of foregoing discussions, the judgments of the High Court deserve to be set aside. All the appeals are allowed. 3.3 Further

JYOTI MALIWAL,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

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

section 10(20) Explanation clause (iii). The High Court has not adverted to the relevant facts and circumstances and without considering the relevant aspects has arrived at erroneous conclusions. Judgments of the High Court are unsustainable. In view of foregoing discussions, the judgments of the High Court deserve to be set aside. All the appeals are allowed. 3.3 Further

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

trusts authorities, etc. may be involved in promoting public objects and also in the course of their pursuing their objects, involved or engaged in activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business....” 11 | P a g e Thus, the activities of housing development and town planning, which is the core activity of the appellant in this case also

BHARAT MATA MANDIR NYAS,BANSWARA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

28,04,078/-. The assessee society is also registered u/s 12AA of the Act, and also registered u/s 80G of the Act w.e.f. dated 01.04.2008 and 14.05.2010 respectively. The assessee is mainly engaged in educational activities. During processing of return u/s 143(1), the revenue rejected the claim u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) as the gross receipt of the society

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

28. Indisputably, the order dated 16th Jan, 2018, made by the Commissioner of Income Tax thereby canceling the registration granted under section 12A and withdrawing the approval given under section 10 (23C) (v) & 10 (23A) (via) of the Act of 1961, to the petitioner Trust with retrospective effect from the date of 01st April, 2006, was arbitrary in the face

SIDDHARTH AGARWAL,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blesiddharth Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of 28, Polo Ground, Income Tax, Cpc, Tds Udaipur - 313001 Udaipur Pan No. Akgpa 4183 N Assessee By Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate (Virtual) Revenue By Smt. Runi Pal – Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 17.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal [Hereinafter Referred To As Cit(A)] Udaipur – 2 Dated 10.06.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2015-16 Challenging Therein The Sustaining The Levy Of Fee U/S 234A Of The Act By The Ao By View Of Rectification Order Dated 12.06.2022 Passed U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Amounting To Rs. 28,600/- & Interest Of Rs. 16,016/- Totalling To Rs. 44,616/-, Although The Amended Law Was Not Applicable For The Year Under Consideration Because It Was Applicable Only With Effect From 01.06.2015. Asst. Year: 2015-16 2 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Appellant Assessee Filed A Rectification Application U/S 154 Of The Act Before The Acit, Cpc-Tds, Vaishali Ghajiabad For Tds In Form 27Q For Financial Year 2014- 15 With Respect To Quarter 4, Subsequently Rectification Order Was Passed On 12.06.2020 Determining Late Filing Fee/Penalty Of Rs. 28,600/- U/S 234A & Interest Of Rs. 16,016/- U/S 220 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Has Been Confirmed By Ld. Cit(A). Ignoring The Fact That Ao Did Not Have Power To Change Fee U/S 234E While Processing Tds Returns & Hence In Absence Of Enabling Provisions, Levy Of Fee Could Not Be Deducted In The Course Of Intimation Issued U/S 200A Prior To 01.06.2015. The Ld. Ar Prayed For Deleting The Fee & Interest Levied By The Acit, Cpc.

Charitable Trust (supra), we hold that since the impugned intimation give by the ACIT, CPC is in violation of Section 200A so far Asst. Year: 2015-16 4 as the period prior to 01.06.2015 can be said as without any authority under Law and hence it is said to be as illegal and invalid. 7. Accordingly, the levy

M/S. GOPAL GOVARDHAN GOSHALA ,SANCHORE, JALORE. vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-EXEMPTION, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmim/S. Gopal Goverdhan Goshala Vs The Dcit Pathmeda, Taluka Sanchore, Circle-Exemption, District- Jalore (Raj) Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg 0739 J

28-03-2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Jodhpur for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:- ‘’1. The Ld. CI(A) has erred on the facts and in law in confirming the denial of the benefit u/s 11 and 12 on the ground that the appellant has violated