vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk

0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ dey's k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@

ITA. No. 333/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@

Assessment Years : 2024-15 Mall of Jaipur Owners Welfare cuke The DCIT, Association Vs. Circle-6, Plot No. 01, Kuber Complex Jaipur.

Scheme Gandhi Path, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur.

LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANAM9374M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Assessee by : Shri Rohan Mittal, Adv.

jktLo dh vksj ls Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@

Date of Hearing : 10/07/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld.

Addl/JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai, dated 09.01.2025 for assessment year 2024-

25, passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').

2. The assessee has raised following grounds:-

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the ld. AO/CPC, in denying the benefit of the basic exemption limit to the assessee, while processing the return of income. The tax liability has been computed at the Maximum Marginal Rate (“MMR”) without allowing the basic exemption as claimed by the assessee. The action of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by allowing the benefit of basic exemption limit to the assessee.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the ld. AO/CPC, in levying surcharge in addition to taxability at MMR. The action of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, and against the fats of the case. Relief may be granted by quashing levy of surcharge on MMR.

3. The assessee craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.”

3. Brief facts are relevant for the adjudication of the present appeal are that the appellant is a Resident Welfare Society registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958. The assessee is a non-profit entity established solely for ensuring maintenance and upkeep of the Mall of Jaipur. The assessee filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act on 31.07.2024, declaring total income of Rs. 22,12,550, comprising solely of interest income earned from fixed deposits. Assessee, at the time of filing the return of income, computed its tax liability at the maximum marginal rate of 30%. The AO(CPC) processed the return under Section 143(1), accepting the returned income but levied surcharge at 25% on the total tax computed.

4. Aggrieved, from the said order of assessment the assessee has filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). who after hearing the contention of the assessee, dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving following findings on the issue:-

“5. Decision: I have gone through the facts of the case, the ground of appeal and the submissions made by the appellant. It is seen that all the grounds raised relate to the levy of surcharge at MMR and hence all the grounds are adjudicated together as under:

5.1 The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a society registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958 with effect from 13.10.2021. The appellant had filed the return as an AOP. In the return of the income for AY 2024-25 the appellant had offered the income from other sources of Rs.22,12,553/-. While processing the return, the taxable income declared by the appellant was accepted by the CPC. The calculation of tax by the assesseee and the CPC u/s

143(1) is given below for ease of reference-

Thus, it is evident that the appellant had not calculated any surcharge for