{"id":32900,"date":"2023-02-24T13:46:22","date_gmt":"2023-02-24T08:16:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-e-v-shri-ramdoot-prasad-sewa-samiti-trust-2022-217-dtr-396-328-ctr-588-2023-450-itr-288-raj-hc\/"},"modified":"2023-02-24T13:46:22","modified_gmt":"2023-02-24T08:16:22","slug":"cit-e-v-shri-ramdoot-prasad-sewa-samiti-trust-2022-217-dtr-396-328-ctr-588-2023-450-itr-288-raj-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-e-v-shri-ramdoot-prasad-sewa-samiti-trust-2022-217-dtr-396-328-ctr-588-2023-450-itr-288-raj-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT (E) v.Shri Ramdoot Prasad Sewa Samiti Trust (2022) 217 DTR 396\/ 328 CTR 588\/ (2023) 450 ITR 288 (Raj)( HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that\u00a0\u00a0 the assessee and\u00a0 Pawansut Trading Co Pvt Ltd. were entities covered under sub-section\u00a0(3)\u00a0of section\u00a013\u00a0. However the Assessing Officer never examined whether the transactions between the assessee and the company were at arm\u2019s length. He merely referred to statutory provisions and without further discussion came to the conclusion that disallowance had to be made. The Commissioner (Appeals) not only criticised this approach of the Assessing Officer but also independently examined whether the transaction was at arm\u2019s length. It was found that the rate paid to the related person was the same as paid to the unrelated party. The Tribunal confirmed this view and correctly so. Order of Tribunal affirmed . \u00a0\u00a0(AY. 2012-13)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 13 : Denial of exemption-Trust or institution-Investment restrictions -Property held for charitable purposes -Transactions between trustee and related party \u2014No evidence of diversion of funds \u2014 Transaction was at arm\u2019s length-  Denial of exemption is not justified .[ S. 11,  12, 13(3)  ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-32900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-8yE","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32900","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32900"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32900\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":32901,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32900\/revisions\/32901"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}