SAMEER DESAI FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

ITA 4508/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 October 2025Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 4509 & 4508/Mum/2025 Sameer Desai Foundation Commissioner of Income Vs 1802, Rustomjee O-Zone 6 tax (Exemptions) Behind Telephone Exchange Goregaon West Motilal Nagar Mumbai - 400104 [PAN: ABNCS4747B] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dharan Gandhi (virtually appeared) a/w Vinita Nara A/Rs Revenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R (virtually appea1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the object clause was not objectionable for rejecting Section 12AB registration, especially since it only allowed arrangements conducive to the trust's objects. Relying on a Delhi High Court precedent, the Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to grant registration under Section 12AB and reconsider the application for Section 80G approval afresh, noting that the objectionable clause had since been amended by the Trust.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G, which were rejected by the CIT(E). The rejection was based on the CIT(E)'s opinion that one of the trust's object clauses, allowing it to apply/receive funds outside India, violated the provisions of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether a trust's object clause enabling it to apply/receive funds outside India is a valid ground for rejecting its applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A,Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 11(1)(a),Section 11(1)(a)(c),Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi (virtually appeared) a/w Vinita Nara A/Rs
Hearing: 15/10/2025Pronounced: 24/10/2025

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: I.T.A. No. 4509 & 4508/Mum/2025 are two separate appeals preferred against two separate orders of ld. CIT(E), Mumbai [hereinafter ld. CIT(E)], dated 28/06/2025, by which the ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and approval u/s 80G of the Act.

2.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application in form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Th

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →