ADHYAKSHYA LOK MELA AMLIKARAN SAMMITTEE,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2),, RAJKOT

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy, आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 424 & 425/Rjt/2018 वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 & 2010-2011 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Adhyakshya Lok Mela Amlikaran Ito Sammittee Vs. Ward-1(2), A.D. Vyas & Co., Kotecha Nagar Rajkot Main Road, Opp. Kotecha Girls High School, Rajkot-360001 Pan: Aabaa0922F Assessee By : Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Common Orders Passed Under Section 263 Of The Act By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajkot Dated 24/03/2014 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Here-In- After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2010- 11. First, We Take Up Ita 424/Rjt/2018, An Appeal By The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Ground No 1 Order Of The Learned Cit 1 Rajkot Reopening The Assessment U/S 263 Is Totally Bad On Facts As Well On Law. Learned Cit Ought To Have Considered The Fact That The Assessee Is Already Assessed U/S 143(3) By Ito 1(2) Rajkot.

disallow the Expenses of Rs 155800/. So even if Rs 155800/ is added to the total income of the assessee, the same is allowable under section 12AA as per the new inserted provision. So addition made is totally in disregard with the proviso to section 12A(2

SHRI RAJKOT VISHASHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

2) of the Act. Further, since the delay in filing appeal has been condoned by CIT(Exemption), no question of invoking section 12A(b) arises. In the alternative, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the provisions of section 143(1) of the Act do not encompass within its scope disallowance

SHREE SANATAN ASHRAM CHARITABLE TRUST,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (4),, AMRELI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.178/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shree Santan Ashram The I.T.O. बनाम/ Charitable Trust Ward-2(4) Vs. Shree Chamunda Temple Amreli Vankiya Bhod Khamba "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajts 7402 B .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : None (Written Submission) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.Dr

section 12A(2) of the Act, we are not inclined to adjudicate other points of contention raised by the AR in the written submission. Thus we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by him by disallowing

LATE SHANTABEN CHANDRASHANKAR VYAS CHARITABLE TRUST,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.25/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2018-2019 वष"

12A(2) of the Act it was entitled to claim such benefit exemption under section 11 of the Act. 7. The learned CIT-A after considering the submission of the assessee confirmed the disallowance

SHRI JAIN SWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK TAPGACHCHH SANGHA,DHORAJI, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE NFAC (APPEALS) DELHI, DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

12A and if they do so, then the assessment has to be completed in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act; if the income is assessed under the residual head full play must be allowed to Section 57(iii). Though prima facie it would appear that the phraseology employed in Section 57(iii) is different from Section

M/S. KUTCH MANDVI BHATIYA MAHAJAN,MANDV-KUTCH vs. THE ITO-WARD-1, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

12A of the Act since 18-06-1984. The return of income was filed by the assessee declaring total income of " 194,500/- on 22-03-2017. Thereafter, the assessee received intimation under section 143(1) of the Act wherein the exemption under section 11(2) of the Act has been disallowed

SHREE MANGROL VANIK DASHA SHRIMALI GNATI SHAPUR DARWAJA,MANGROAL-362225 vs. THE ITO (EXMPTION) WARD-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the order passed by Ld

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

12A of the Act and offered tax at normal rate as applicable to individual/non-specific trust. The assessee did not claim any deduction under section 11 of the Act. Therefore, if the AO wanted to disallow all the expenses claimed by the assessee, then the proper procedure was to issue notice under section 143(2

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SMT. MANISHABEN N. MASHRU,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavsr.No.

12A) of the IT Act. There was no case for making the addition u/s68 of the Act on the basis of jotting in impounded documents. Further, the AO has made the addition of admitted income of Rs.36,50,978/- while finalizing the assessment for the assessment year 2005-06. There was no justification for making such a fresh addition

SHRI PLOT SWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK JAIN TAPGACHCHHA SANGH,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, RAJKOT

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

12A of the Act. The assessee in the year under consideration filed its return of income at NIL after claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act. One of the exemption claimed by the assessee in the return of income was representing the deemed income under Section 11(3) of the Act amounting to Rs. 17,00,000/- only which

SHRI PLOT SWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK JAIN TAPGACHCHHA SANGH,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, RAJKOT

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

12A of the Act. The assessee in the year under consideration filed its return of income at NIL after claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act. One of the exemption claimed by the assessee in the return of income was representing the deemed income under Section 11(3) of the Act amounting to Rs. 17,00,000/- only which

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

section 10(23C) (iiiab) and 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The appellant has, however, claimed exemption u/s.11 of the Act where the appellant filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the appellant that it was not liable to file return is incorrect. The Assessing Officer stated that during

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

section 10(23C) (iiiab) and 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The appellant has, however, claimed exemption u/s.11 of the Act where the appellant filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the appellant that it was not liable to file return is incorrect. The Assessing Officer stated that during

SHREE MALIYA KADVA PATEL SEVA SAMAJ,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, VERAVAL

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in above terms

disallowance of expenditure made by the AO shall have no relevance and cannot result into positive income at all. 10. Corpus donations are capital receipts, irrespective of whether a trust enjoys benefit of sec. 11 and 12 or not. Case Law Compilation Case Law Citation Page No. Hamdard National Foundation (2020) 82 ITR (Trib) 164 127-133 India Delhi Prakash

ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GUJ-W-201-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.731/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing)

2. Incorrect Application of MMR: 6 ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS Please see our arguments above. The application of the Maximum Marginal Rate (MMR) to the appellant's income by the CPC is thus erroneous. The appellant's income should have been taxed at normal rates applicable to an Association of Persons (AOP) since it qualifies under the mutuality principle

DR. SUBHASH PETHALJI CHAVDA AHIR KELVANI MANDAL,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), WARD-2,, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

2, Rajkot has erred in law and facts in disallowing claim of depreciation of Rs. 32,70,994/-, which may kindly allowed and justice be done. 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the issue stands covered as settled in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case

SWAMINARAYAN SEVA NIKETAN,,JUNAGADH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-2,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

disallowance of depreciation is to be claimed as double deduction or not. 11. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of CIT vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation [2018] 402 ITR 441 wherein Apex Court has held as follows: “Depreciation - Allowance/Rate of (Charitable trust) (Position prior to 1-4-2015) - Whether in case of assessee-charitable institution registered under section

THE ITO, (E)- WARD-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. ASHOK GONDHIA MEMORIAL TRUST, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 6. The only issue raised

THE ITO, (E)- WARD-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. ASHOK GONDHIA MEMORIAL TRUST, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 6. The only issue raised

THE ITO, (E)- WARD-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. ASHOK GONDHIA MEMORIAL TRUST, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 6. The only issue raised